The Effectiveness of Selective Laser Trabeculoplasty in Patients with Medically Uncontrolled Open-angle Glaucoma

Won Park Hye; Soo Han Seung; Woon Park Jong

doi:10.3341/jkos.2017.58.7.828

Journal List > J Korean Ophthalmol Soc > v.58(7) > 1010813

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Hye, Seung, and Jong: The Effectiveness of Selective Laser Trabeculoplasty in Patients with Medically Uncontrolled Open-angle Glaucoma

Original Article

J Korean Ophthalmol Soc 2017;58(7):828-835.

Published online: 8 September 2017

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3341/jkos.2017.58.7.828

The Effectiveness of Selective Laser Trabeculoplasty in Patients with Medically Uncontrolled Open-angle Glaucoma

Won Park Hye, M.D.^1,², Soo Han Seung, M.D., MPH^1,^2,³, Woon Park Jong, M.D.^2,

¹The Institute of Vision Research, Department of Ophthalmology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

²Department of Ophthalmology, National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Korea

³Department of Ophthalmology, Suncheon Medical Center, Suncheon, Korea

Address reprint requests to Jong Woon Park, MD Department of Ophthalmology, National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital, #100 Ilsan-ro, Ilsandong-gu, Goyang 10444, Korea Tel: 82-31-900-0590, Fax: 82-31-900-0049 E-mail: unij143@naver.com

* This study was presented as an e-poster at the 116th Annual Meeting of the Korean Ophthalmological Society 2016.

* Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts to disclose.

Received 12 January 201724 April 2017 Accepted 16 June 2017

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

To determine the effect of intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction of selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) on medically uncontrolled open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and the factors associated with the treatment result.

Methods

Forty-seven eyes of 47 OAG patients were enrolled for 180° SLT or 360° SLT, all under maximal tolerated medical therapy and with IOP above their target pressure. All patients were followed-up for at least 1 year after the procedure. Treatment success was defined as IOP reduction ≥20% from baseline at 12 months after SLT treatment without additional anti-glaucoma-tous intervention.

Results

The treatment success rate was 65.96%. Baseline IOP was 23.84 ± 4.52 mmHg in the success group and 21.44 ± 2.97 mmHg in the failure group (p = 0.035). Significant mean IOP reduction was observed at 6, 9, and 12 month follow-ups (p = 0.001 at 6 months; 0.041 at 9 months, and <0.001 at 12 months). The success rate did not vary significantly by sex (p = 0.362), age (p = 0.081), history of cataract surgery (p = 0.470), number of medications (p = 0.857), duration of medication (p = 0.613), or an-gular degree of SLT treatment (180° vs. 360°) (p = 0.137). There was a positive correlation between mean baseline IOP and mean reduction of IOP from baseline in the success group (p < 0.001, r = 0.861), while there was no such correlation in the failure group (p = 0.272, r = -2.921).

Conclusions

SLT was an effective treatment for IOP reduction until 12 months in medically uncontrolled OAG patients. A greater amount of IOP reduction is expected in patients with higher baseline IOP in the success group.

Go to :

Keywords: Intraocular pressure (IOP), Maximal tolerated medical therapy (MTMT), Selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT), Uncontrolled glaucoma

References

1. Latina MA, Park C. Selective targeting of trabecular meshwork cells: in vitro studies of pulsed and CW laser interactions. Exp Eye Res. 1995; 60:359–71.

2. Lai JS, Chua JK, Tham CC, Lam DS. Five-year follow up of se-lective laser trabeculoplasty in Chinese eyes. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2004; 32:368–72.

3. McIlraith I, Strasfeld M, Colev G, Hutnik CM. Selective laser tra-beculoplasty as initial and adjunctive treatment for open-angle glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2006; 15:124–30.

4. Juzych MS, Chopra V, Banitt MR. . Comparison of long-term outcomes of selective laser trabeculoplasty versus argon laser tra-beculoplasty in open-angle glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2004; 111:1853–9.

5. Song J, Lee PP, Epstein DL. . High failure rate associated with 180 selective laser trabeculoplasty. J Glaucoma. 2005; 14:400–8.

6. Ayala M, Chen E. Comparison of selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) in primary open angle glaucoma and pseudoexfoliation glaucoma. Clin Ophthalmol. 2011; 5:1469–73.

7. Stein JD, Challa P. Mechanisms of action and efficacy of argon la-ser trabeculoplasty and selective laser trabeculoplasty. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2007; 18:140–5.

8. Latina MA, Gulati V. Selective laser trabeculoplasty: stimulating the meshwork to mend its ways. Internati Int Ophthalmol Clin. 2004; 44:93–103.

9. Moon SJ, Choi ES, Park JI, Lee KH. Two-year follow-up of se-lective laser trabeculoplasty as initial and adjunctive treatment for ocular hypertension and open angle glaucoma. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2010; 51:974–80.

10. Park JJ, Lee JW, Lee KW. Comparison of clinical outcomes of ar-gon laser versus selective laser trabeculoplasty in POAG. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2008; 49:1491–500.

11. Park HJ, Park JW. Effect of prior cataract surgery on the clinical outcome of selective laser trabeculoplasty. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2015; 56:911–6.

12. Jang YS, Kim JM, Lim TH. . Comparison of 180 and 360 se-lective laser trabeculoplasty. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2012; 53:291–6.

13. Lee JW, Kim EJ, Lee TY, Lee KW. Comparison of efficacy and safety between superior 180 degree and inferior 180 degree se-lective laser trabeculoplasty. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2012; 53:1642–8.

14. Lee JY, Lee YK, Moon JI, Park MH. Long-term outcomes and pre-dictive factors for success of selective laser trabeculoplasty. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2014; 55:1347–54.

15. O’conor DJ, Caprioli J. Comparison of methods to detect glaucom-atous damage. Ophthalmology. 1993; 100:1498–503.

16. Suh W, Jun RM, Choi KR. Longitudinal analysis of retinal nerve fi-ber layer thickness with GDx-VCC in glaucoma suspect. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2009; 50:235–41.

17. Kim DY, Singh A. Severe iritis and choroidal effusion following selective laser trabeculoplasty. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2008; 39:409–11.

18. Song J. Complications of selective laser trabeculoplasty: a review. Clin Ophthalmol. 2016; 10:137–43.

19. Hodge WG, Damji KF, Rock W. . Baseline IOP predicts se-lective laser trabeculoplasty success at 1 year post-treatment: re-sults from a randomised clinical trial. Br J Ophthalmol. 2005; 89:1157–60.

20. Weinand FS, Althen F. Long-term clinical results of selective laser trabeculoplasty in the treatment of primary open angle glaucoma. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2006; 16:100–4.

21. Sayin N, Alkin Z, Ozkaya A. . Efficacy of selective laser trabe-culoplasty in medically uncontrolled glaucoma. ISRN Ophthalmol. 2013; 2013:975281.

22. Gracner T, Naji M, Hudovernik M. . Predictive factors of suc-cessful selective laser trabeculoplasty in open-angle glaucoma. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 2007; 224:922–6.

23. Busbee BG, Recchia FM, Kaiser R. . Bleb-associated endoph-thalmitis: clinical characteristics and visual outcomes. Ophthalmology. 2004; 111:1495–503 discussion 1503.

24. DeBry PW, Perkins TW, Heatley G. . Incidence of late-onset bleb-related complications following trabeculectomy with mitomycin. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002; 120:297–300.

25. Jampel HD, Musch DC, Gillespie BW. . Perioperative compli-cations of trabeculectomy in the collaborative initial glaucoma treatment study (CIGTS). Am J Ophthalmol. 2005; 140:16–22.

26. Gracner T. Intraocular pressure response to selective laser trabecu-loplasty in the treatment of primary open-angle glaucoma. Ophthalmologica. 2001; 215:267–70.

27. The Glaucoma Laser Trial (GLT). 2. Results of argon laser trabecu-loplasty versus topical medicines. The Glaucoma Laser Trial Research Group. Ophthalmology. 1990; 97:1403–13.

28. Reiss GR, Wilensky JT, Higginbotham EJ. Laser trabeculoplasty. Surv Ophthalmol. 1991; 35:407–28.

29. Ederer F, Gaasterland DA, Dally LG. . The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS): 13. Comparison of treatment outcomes within race: 10-year results. Ophthalmology. 2004; 111:651–64.

30. Prasad N, Murthy S, Dagianis JJ, Latina MA. A comparison of the intervisit intraocular pressure fluctuation after 180 and 360 degrees of selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) as a primary therapy in pri-mary open angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension. J Glaucoma. 2009; 18:157–60.

31. Seymenoğ lu G, Baser EF. Efficacy of selective laser trabeculo-plasty in phakic and pseudophakic eyes. J Glaucoma. 2015; 24:105–10.

32. Shazly TA, Latina MA, Dagianis JJ, Chitturi S. Effect of prior cata-ract surgery on the long-term outcome of selective laser trabeculoplasty. Clin Ophthalmol. 2011; 5:377–80.

33. Werner M, Smith MF, Doyle JW. Selective laser trabeculoplasty in phakic and pseudophakic eyes. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2007; 38:182–8.

Go to :

Figure 1.

Pearson correlation of baseline intraocular pressure (IOP) and IOP reduction after 12 months. IOP measurements obtained by Goldmann applanation tonometer.

undefined

Table 1.

The general characteristics of 47 patients with medi-cally uncontrolled open-angle glaucoma

Characteristics	Data
Age (years)	66.76 ± 11.90
Affected eye (n, %)
Right eye	24 (51.06)
Left eye	23 (48.94)
Sex (n, %)
Male	28 (59.57)
Female	19 (40.43)
Lens status, phakic (n, %)	32 (68.09)
Baseline IOP (mmHg)	23.02 ± 4.19
Type of laser (n, %)
180° SLT	14 (29.79)
360° SLT	33 (70.21)
Mean duration of medication (months)	59.51 ± 52.34
Number of medication (n, %)
1	7 (14.89)
2	23 (48.94)
3	17 (36.17)
Comorbidities
Hypertension	9 (19.15)
Diabetic mellitus type 2	24 (51.06)
Visual acuity
BCVA (logMAR)	0.19 ± 0.23
Refraction
Spherical power (diopters)	-1.33 ± 2.41
Cylindrical power (diopters)	-0.80 ± 0.71
Visual field
MD (dB)	-15.86 ± 7.39
PSD (dB)	10.05 ± 2.90

Values are presented as mean ± SD or n (%) unless otherwise indicated. IOP = intraocular pressure; SLT = selective laser trabeculoplasty; BCVA = best corrected visual acuity; MD = mean deviation; PSD = pattern standard deviation.

Table 2.

Comparison of baseline characteristics between success and failure group

Characteristics	Success^* (n = 31)	Failure (n = 16)	p-value^†
Age (n, %)			0.081
>70 years old	20 (76.92)	6 (23.08)
≤70 years old	11 (52.38)	10 (47.62)
Sex (n, %)			0.362
Male	17 (60.71)	11 (39.29)
Female	14 (73.68)	5 (26.32)
Lens status, phakic (n, %)			0.470
Pseudo-phakic	11 (73.33)	4 (26.67)
Phackic	20 (62.50)	12 (37.50)
Baseline IOP (mmHg)	23.84 ± 4.52	21.44 ± 2.97	0.035
Type of laser (n, %)			0.137
180° SLT	7 (50.00)	7 (50.00)
360° SLT	24 (72.73)	9 (27.27)
Mean duration of medication (n, %)			0.613
>4 years	15 (62.50)	9 (37.50)
≤4 years	16 (69.57)	7 (30.43)
Number of medication (n, %)			0.857
1	4 (57.14)	3 (42.86)
2	16 (69.57)	7 (30.43)
3	11 (64.71)	6 (32.29)
Comorbidities
Hypertension			0.613
Yes	15 (62.50)	9 (37.50)
No	16 (69.57)	7 (30.43)
Diabetic mellitus type 2			0.469
Yes	5 (55.56)	4 (44.44)
No	26 (68.42)	12 (31.58)
BCVA (logMAR)	0.19 ± 0.25	0.18 ± 0.19	0.900
Refraction
Spherical power (diopters)	-1.29 ± 2.51	-1.42 ± 2.37	0.900
Cylindrical power (diopters)	-0.66 ± 0.74	-1.11 ± 0.57	0.117
Visual field
MD (dB)	-15.40 ± 6.86	-16.71 ± 8.43	0.576
PSD (dB)	10.05 ± 2.82	10.05 ± 3.14	0.995

^* Success was defined as ≥20% reduction in IOP from baseline at 12 months after treatment with no additional anti-glaucomatous intervention;

^† p-value was acquired from chi-square test except baseline IOP, BCVA, refraction, and visual field of which p-value was acquired from Student's t-test.

Table 3.

IOP reduction throughout the 12 months follow up period

Variables	Success	Failure	p-value^*
Baseline IOP (mmHg)	23.84 ± 4.52	21.44 ± 2.97	0.062
1 week	18.06 ± 3.87	17.75 ± 5.93	0.850
1 month	16.58 ± 3.51	16.19 ± 1.94	0.624
3 months	16.32 ± 4.34	17.19 ± 4.65	0.531
6 months	15.52 ± 3.00	19.00 ± 3.65	0.001
9 months	15.57 ± 2.83	19.62 ± 6.21	0.041
12 months	14.84 ± 2.33	20.81 ± 4.82	<0.001

Values are presented as mean ± SD unless otherwise indicated. IOP = intraocular pressure.

^* p-value was acquired from Student’s t-test.

Table 4.

Association between success and demographic variables for multivariate logistic regression

Variables	Adjusted OR	95% CI	p-value
Age
≤70 years old	1 (ref)
>70 years old	5.833	0.755-45.062	0.091
Sex
Male	1 (ref)
Female	1.295	0.224-7.476	0.773
Lens status
Phackic	1 (ref)
Pseudo-phakic	1.008	0.151-6.730	0.994
Baseline IOP (mmHg)	1.264	0.967-1.652	0.086
Type of laser
180° SLT	1 (ref)
360° SLT	2.956	0.476-18.346	0.245
Number of medication
1	1 (ref)
2	1.002	0.127-7.892	0.999
3	1.519	0.154-14.941	0.720
Mean duration of medication
>4 years	1 (ref)
≤4 years	0.893	0.200-3.996	0.883
Comorbidities
Hypertension	0.194	0.022-1.689	0.138
Diabetic mellitus type 2	1.023	0.169-6.187	0.980

OR = odds ratio; CI = confidential interval; ref = reference; IOP = intraocular pressure; SLT = selective laser trabeculoplasty.

TOOLS

Similar articles