You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
MDPIMDPI
Search all articles
Journal of Clinical & Translational Ophthalmology
Download PDF
  • Article
  • Open Access

15 December 2025

Balancing Pressure and Pills: Short-Term Outcomes of Goniotomy vs. Trabeculectomy in Adult Glaucoma

and
Department of Ophthalmology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL 33612, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Clin. Transl. Ophthalmol.2025, 3(4), 27;https://doi.org/10.3390/jcto3040027
Version Notes
Order Reprints
Review Reports

Abstract

Background: Trabeculectomy and minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) such as goniotomy aim to reduce intraocular pressure (IOP) and medication burden but are often performed in patients with differing disease severity. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 100 eyes from 76 adults with glaucoma that underwent either goniotomy (n = 50; Kahook Dual Blade = 42, OMNI = 8) or trabeculectomy ab externo (n = 50) at a tertiary center between May 2022 and June 2023, with at least six months of follow-up. Baseline and six-month IOP, number of medications, and postoperative complications were recorded. Eyes undergoing trabeculectomy had higher preoperative IOP than those undergoing goniotomy (22.6 ± 7.7 vs. 19.1 ± 5.9 mmHg). Results: At six months, trabeculectomy achieved a greater absolute IOP reduction (8.8 ± 0.8 vs. 5.4 ± 0.8 mmHg; p = 0.004), likely reflecting higher baseline IOP, while goniotomy yielded a larger medication reduction (1.47 ± 0.30 vs. 0.72 ± 0.20; p = 0.041). Hyphema occurred more often after trabeculectomy, and the small number of OMNI cases precluded device comparison. Conclusions: In this short-term retrospective series, trabeculectomy achieved larger absolute IOP reduction whereas goniotomy offered greater medication reduction, highlighting the need to individualize surgical choice and confirm these findings in larger prospective studies.

1. Introduction

Glaucoma is a multifactorial eye disorder marked by progressive optic neuropathy, leading to irreversible vision loss if not adequately controlled due to elevated intraocular pressures (IOP). It stands as one of the leading causes of blindness in the United States, affecting over 4 million people as of 2022, and projected to increase further [1]. Typically, this disease is initially medically managed, using medication such as prostaglandins, adrenergic agents, beta-blockers, and carbonic anhydrase inhibitors. However, if the condition continues to progress or if the initial presentation is very acute, procedural therapy may be required. This most commonly involves laser procedures and surgery [2]. There are many types of surgery currently being used, among them, trabeculectomy, valve placement, and the minimally invasive glaucoma surgeries such as the goniotomy.
Globally, glaucoma management strategies continue to evolve in response to the increasing disease burden [3]. With aging populations and improved life expectancy, clinicians are challenged to not only achieve adequate IOP control but also reduce the complexity of treatment and improve patient quality of life over decades of care. Medication adherence remains a critical issue and limitation of medical therapy, with some studies showing that up to 50% of patients discontinue one or more of their glaucoma medications within the first few months of treatment [4,5]. This nonadherence can manifest as further disease progression and vision loss, underscoring the need for durable, effective surgical alternatives. This is especially the case for patient populations such as incarcerated patients where reliable access to medications can be difficult, thus further contributing to worse outcomes where their intraocular pressures increase and visual field deficits become more pronounced.
Furthermore, it is important to note that medication nonadherence in glaucoma is multifactorial, encompassing both intentional and unintentional behaviors. Due to complex drop schedules often involving multiple medications, patients can struggle with forgetting to take one or more of their medications, as mentioned previously. Additionally, it can be a difficult burden for patients to consistently place these eyedrops into their eyes on a regular basis, especially if they require assistance to do so. Nonadherence can result in worsening vision over time due to high intraocular pressures [6].
Beyond these challenges of medication schedule complexity and forgetfulness, several other burdens can further compromise adherence. Limited transportation to medical appointments or pharmacies may prevent timely prescription refills, particularly for elderly or socioeconomically disadvantaged patients. Medication availability can also be inconsistent, especially in rural areas or otherwise under-resourced healthcare systems, leading to interruptions in therapy despite the patient being motivated to continue their treatment regimens [7]. Comorbidities should not be ignored as well. Physical issues with eye drop instillation, including poor vision, arthritis, or tremors, add another layer of complexity, as these patients may be unable to accurately administer drops even when they wish to comply. In addition, these medications have common side effects, such as ocular burning, hyperemia, altered taste, and even systemic effects such bradycardia and hypotension due to the use of beta blockers [8]. These effects, compounded with systemic barriers to medication access, can discourage regular use over time.
In addition, adherence can decrease with chronic use of these medications, as asymptomatic patients may perceive fewer immediate benefits and become fatigued with treatment routines after many years of disease stability [9]. These patients may choose to completely discontinue medications when side effects seemingly outweigh perceived advantages. This gradual decline in adherence highlights the gap between that viewed in controlled clinical trials and real-world patterns, where long-term patient behavior often determines outcomes more than pharmacological effectiveness alone.
In light of medication adherence issues in certain patient populations, the treatment paradigm has shifted to procedures that can both achieve pressure reduction and reduce dependence on topical therapies, prompting interest in older procedures such as trabeculectomies and other, newer procedures that have risen in popularity [10].
Trabeculectomy has long been considered one of the most effective surgical procedures for lowering IOP in glaucoma, functioning by creating a fistula for aqueous humor in the eye to bypass the blocked trabecular meshwork into the subconjunctival space [11]. It has been associated with marked reductions in IOP [12]. Despite its efficacy, trabeculectomy has been previously seen in trials and multicenter studies to be associated with potential complications such as hypotony, bleb leaks, choroidal effusion, cataract, and a flat anterior chamber when compared to medical management or other noninvasive procedures [12,13].
Minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS), also known as microinvasive glaucoma surgery, is a newer set of procedures, involving the lowering of IOP through a variety of different methods. These include increasing aqueous outflow from trabecular meshwork and Schlemm’s canal, increasing uveoscleral outflow through suprachoroidal space, creating a shunt through the subconjunctival space, and decreasing aqueous production [14]. One of the procedures that falls under MIGS is the goniotomy, which involves excising the trabecular meshwork, thus providing an area of flow from the anterior chamber to Schlemm’s canal without the formation of a bleb, resulting in lower complication rates [14,15,16].
Even though glaucoma surgeries such as MIGS often reduce both intraocular pressure and the need for topical medications, many patients ultimately remain on pharmacologic therapy long-term [15]. The primary goal of MIGS is frequently to decrease medication burden and improve quality of life rather than to completely eliminate the need for drops, particularly in patients with moderate to advanced disease where lifelong pressure control remains essential. Some patients may come to surgery expecting to be medication-free afterward, so counseling before the procedure is critical to set realistic expectations and ensure satisfaction even when long-term therapy remains necessary. Outcomes can also vary considerably between individuals: while some eyes achieve excellent, sustained pressure control, others show a more limited or transient response due to factors such as postoperative scarring, baseline ocular anatomy, or the need for very low target pressures in advanced disease [17]. Patients with more severe glaucoma often require lower intraocular pressures than MIGS alone can reliably achieve, which explains why some eventually need to restart medications or undergo additional surgery despite initial improvement.
As time passes after MIGS, healing responses such as fibrosis or subconjunctival scarring can reduce aqueous outflow, leading to gradual increases in pressure and the need for adjunctive therapy [18]. In some cases, long-term disease progression occurs despite apparently adequate pressure lowering, reflecting the multifactorial nature of glaucoma damage. Repeat procedures or escalation to more invasive options like trabeculectomy or tube shunts may be required when intraocular pressure or visual field stability cannot be maintained. For these reasons, MIGS is increasingly viewed as part of a staged treatment algorithm rather than a one-time intervention, providing meaningful pressure and medication reduction while preserving future surgical options if the disease progresses [19]. Patients and clinicians must therefore approach MIGS as one step in a long-term management strategy that often involves continued medications, close follow-up, and the possibility of additional procedures over time.
There is limited evidence in the literature directly comparing outcomes between trabeculectomies and goniotomies in similar patient populations [20]. The purpose of this manuscript is to provide a comparative analysis of surgical outcomes, complication profiles, and IOP control between these two procedures at a single center. Our findings aim to add to the growing body of evidence on these glaucoma procedures and to help guide clinicians on selecting the most appropriate surgical procedure for patients who require operative intervention for glaucoma management. In particular, we sought to compare postoperative medication burden between the two surgeries, as this outcome has received less attention in prior studies despite its importance in long-term disease management. By addressing this gap, our study aims to provide data that may better inform treatment decisions and future research on glaucoma surgical care. Therefore, our aim was to compare short-term (6-month) outcomes of intraocular pressure (IOP) change, change in number of glaucoma medications, and early complications between eyes undergoing goniotomy and those undergoing trabeculectomy at a single tertiary center. We hypothesized that trabeculectomy would yield a greater absolute IOP reduction, whereas both procedures would demonstrate a similar reduction in medication burden.

2. Materials and Methods

This retrospective comparative study included 76 patients who underwent either goniotomy or trabeculectomy ab externo between May 2022 and June 2023 at a single tertiary care center. The Institutional Review Board of the University of South Florida approval was obtained (approval code: STUDY006689, approval date: 3 May 2024). Patients were eligible if they had a diagnosis of glaucoma, required surgical intervention to lower intraocular pressure (IOP), and completed at least six months of follow-up.
Exclusion criteria included prior incisional glaucoma surgery on the same eye (other than cataract surgery), active ocular infection or inflammation (such as blepharitis, conjunctivitis, keratitis, or uveitis), visually significant corneal opacity or edema that could interfere with accurate IOP measurement, uncontrolled systemic infection, and other ocular comorbidities that could confound postoperative outcomes. These comorbidities included eyes with advanced diabetic retinopathy, chronic uveitis, pseudoexfoliation with zonular instability, or prior penetrating keratoplasty. Eyes with incomplete follow-up data or missing baseline IOP were also excluded.
A total of 100 eyes from 76 patients met the study criteria: 50 eyes underwent goniotomy (Kahook Dual Blade, n = 42; OMNI system, n = 8) and 50 eyes underwent standard trabeculectomy ab externo. Because of the small number of OMNI cases, comparisons between devices were considered exploratory only. In some instances, both eyes from the same patient were included, which introduces potential non-independence of observations that is acknowledged as a study limitation.
Postoperative drop tapering and the decision to restart glaucoma medications were determined by the operating surgeon based on IOP, anterior chamber status, and clinical judgment. No standardized postoperative medication protocol was used, which may have contributed to differences in medication reduction between groups.
Baseline variables included patient demographics, ocular comorbidities, glaucoma subtype, and preoperative IOP. Each patient’s IOP and glaucoma medication regimen were recorded at the preoperative visit and at the six-month postoperative follow-up. Complications assessed included hyphema, infection, and need for additional operations within the six-month postoperative period. The primary endpoint was six-month IOP change, while secondary endpoints included change in number of glaucoma medications and rates of hyphema, infection, and reoperation.
Statistical analyses were performed using paired t-tests for within-group comparisons (preoperative vs. postoperative values) and independent t-tests for between-group comparisons (goniotomy vs. trabeculectomy). No statistical adjustments were made for baseline IOP or glaucoma severity, as the study design involved direct unadjusted group comparisons. Categorical variables were compared using Fisher’s exact test. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

3. Results

Data from 100 eyes (49 right eyes and 51 left eyes) were included. Of these, 66.8 years was the mean age of patients in the goniotomy group, and 67.6 years was the mean age in the trabeculectomy group. In the goniotomy group, 32% of the operated eyes were from male patients, whereas in the trabeculectomy group, 54% were from male patients. The most common associated comorbidities across all participants included cataracts (57%), type 2 diabetes mellitus (23%), and hypertension (12%). Open-angle glaucoma was the leading indication for surgical intervention in 72% of the cases (Table 1).
Table 1. Baseline characteristics.
Prior to surgery, the mean IOP was significantly higher in the trabeculectomy group than in the goniotomy group (22.62 ± 7.71 mmHg vs. 19.12 ± 5.86 mmHg, p = 0.03). Six months postoperatively, mean IOP decreased from 22.62 ± 7.71 mmHg to 13.84 ± 4.93 mmHg in the trabeculectomy group and from 19.12 ± 5.86 mmHg to 13.76 ± 3.74 mmHg in the goniotomy group. The absolute IOP reduction was greater following trabeculectomy (8.78 ± 0.84 mmHg) than goniotomy (5.36 ± 0.81 mmHg, p = 0.004), likely reflecting the higher baseline IOP and more advanced disease severity among trabeculectomy patients. While this difference was statistically significant, the clinical magnitude (≈3–4 mmHg) should be interpreted in the context of each patient’s target pressure. No significant differences in IOP reduction were found between the Kahook Dual Blade and OMNI devices within the goniotomy subgroup.
Regarding medication use, the goniotomy group experienced a greater mean reduction in the number of glaucoma medications than the trabeculectomy group at six months (1.47 ± 0.30 vs. 0.72 ± 0.20, p = 0.041). Because postoperative tapering was guided by surgeon discretion rather than a standardized protocol, these differences should be interpreted cautiously.
Postoperative hyphema occurred more frequently in the trabeculectomy group (p = 0.031), whereas infection and reoperation rates did not differ significantly between groups (p = 1.00 and p = 0.249, respectively) (Table 2). No cases of endophthalmitis, bleb leak, or persistent hypotony were observed. Most IOP reduction occurred within the first postoperative month in both groups, with relative stability thereafter. The initial drop in IOP was more pronounced after trabeculectomy, whereas goniotomy produced a more gradual decline. Subgroup analysis by race and sex showed no statistically significant differences in outcomes.
Table 2. Comparison of goniotomy and trabeculectomy outcomes.

4. Discussion

This study compared goniotomy vs. trabeculectomy outcomes at a single center. Our findings highlight key differences in surgical outcomes between goniotomy and trabeculectomy ab externo for patients with glaucoma. These findings reflect real-world patterns in which trabeculectomy is typically selected for patients with higher baseline IOPs or more advanced disease, whereas goniotomy is often chosen for earlier-stage or medication-intolerant patients. Trabeculectomy achieved a greater absolute reduction in IOP at six months, which likely reflects its selection for eyes with higher baseline IOPs and more advanced disease, whereas the goniotomy group demonstrated a greater reduction in medication burden. At our center, surgeons preferentially selected trabeculectomy for eyes requiring larger pressure reductions or with more advanced disease, so this selection bias likely contributed to the greater absolute IOP reduction observed in that group.
These results suggest that while trabeculectomy may be optimal for patients requiring a greater reduction in IOP, goniotomy may be useful in scenarios where reducing medication burden is advantageous, such as if a patient is less tolerant of multiple eye drops.
Although there is limited data in the literature comparing IOP reduction and medication burden between the two procedures in adults, our findings of reduced medication burden following goniotomy have been seen in a 2018 study by Berdahl et al., which focused on goniotomy outcomes with the Kahook Dual Blade [21]. We recorded a slightly greater decrease in medication use 6 months post-procedure with the Kahook Dual Blade. Other studies with longer-follow up times have reported similar decreases in medication use following goniotomy [22,23,24].
Postoperative medication tapering was not standardized and was instead determined by surgeon discretion, which could also contribute to differences in postoperative drop use between groups. Furthermore, in contrast to trabeculectomy, goniotomy modifies the native drainage pathway without creating a filtering bleb [21]. Therefore, there may be less of a postoperative need for adjunctive medications to maintain that channel, particularly in patients whose baseline IOP is not extremely high. This contrasts with trabeculectomy, which involves creating the fistula so that aqueous humor can exit the anterior chamber into the filtering bleb, leading to more scarring or leaking, often requiring more medications to control these potential complications [25,26,27]. However, it should not be ignored that this is also due to the severity of disease in the trabeculectomy group versus the goniotomy group, which could play a role in the medication reduction discrepancy. Furthermore, the mean IOP reduction was lower in the goniotomy group as compared to the trabeculectomy group, translating to a greater net reduction in the number of glaucoma drops required, especially in certain patients with milder disease.
The greater IOP reduction in the trabeculectomy group could be explained by the greater baseline preoperative IOP in the trabeculectomy group. Patients who present with higher preoperative IOP are often steered toward more aggressive procedures, such as trabeculectomy, because of the magnitude of pressure reduction needed [28]. Conversely, a lower preoperative IOP might make a MIGS procedure like goniotomy sufficiently effective at controlling IOP while also simplifying postoperative medical regimens. The variance in baseline IOP could partially explain why trabeculectomy patients achieved a greater net IOP decrease, as they started from a higher baseline.
Furthermore, there was no significant difference in outcomes between eyes undergoing goniotomy with the Kahook Dual Blade versus the OMNI device. However, interpretation of this comparison is limited by the small number of OMNI cases (n = 8), which restricts statistical power for detecting meaningful differences. There is currently limited data in the literature comparing the efficacy of these two devices [29,30]. Additional studies with longer follow-up times are warranted to see if one device might yield more durable results than the other.
The observed differences in medication reduction and pressure control underscore the importance of individualizing surgical choices and adopting a sequenced treatment strategy rather than relying on a one-size-fits-all approach. In patients with advanced glaucoma, very high baseline IOPs, or rapidly progressing visual field loss, trabeculectomy may remain the preferred option because of its well-established ability to achieve profound and sustained pressure lowering, as mentioned previously. These patients often require the lowest possible target pressures to preserve vision, making the stronger efficacy of trabeculectomy clinically advantageous despite its higher risk profile and more demanding postoperative care. Conversely, goniotomy and other MIGS techniques may be especially suitable for individuals with mild to moderate disease, those with high IOPs undergoing cataract surgery, those who struggle with medication adherence, and patients who prefer a lower surgical risk. MIGS has been shown to meaningfully reduce IOP and medication burden while preserving tissue for future interventions down the road if disease progresses further [18]. This flexibility allows clinicians to integrate MIGS into a stepwise treatment algorithm in which less invasive procedures are performed earlier, reserving trabeculectomy or tube shunts for later stages if additional pressure lowering becomes necessary.
Beyond specific clinical outcomes, the decision between trabeculectomy and goniotomy has several implications for both healthcare resource utilization and patient quality of life. For example, trabeculectomy can require a more intensive postoperative regimen, including frequent clinic visits for bleb management, as well as possible needling procedures [31,32]. In our cohort, hyphema occurred more frequently after trabeculectomy. Although there is limited direct evidence comparing hyphema rates between trabeculectomy and angle-based MIGS procedures, previous studies suggest that postoperative hyphema is not uncommon after trabeculectomy and can reach rates that tend to be higher than those found post-MIGS [33,34]. These additional visits and procedures can increase both patient burden and cost of care, thus contributing to more healthcare resource utilization. Conversely, goniotomy tends to have a more streamlined follow-up process, which can be a practical advantage in clinical settings with limited access to care, or even for patients with transportation or comorbid challenges. These factors, while not quantified in this study, remain essential considerations when translating surgical outcomes into real-world clinical decisions.
There are several limitations to this study that should be considered. The retrospective design introduces inherent selection bias and limits control over confounding variables. Surgeon preference, patient comorbidities, and glaucoma severity likely influenced the choice of procedure, and we did not perform statistical adjustments for baseline IOP or disease severity, as the study was designed to reflect real-world, unadjusted outcomes. Additionally, postoperative medication tapering was not standardized and was determined by surgeon discretion, which may have contributed to differences in medication reduction between groups. The inclusion of some patients with both eyes introduces potential non-independence of observations, and the small number of OMNI cases (n = 8) limits the ability to draw device-specific conclusions. The six-month follow-up period restricts assessment of long-term IOP stability, bleb-related complications, and visual field outcomes [35,36]. Larger, prospective studies with longer follow-up (24–36 months) are warranted to confirm these findings and to assess durability, late complications, and visual function outcomes.

5. Conclusions

Our results indicate that trabeculectomy ab externo achieved a greater absolute reduction in IOP, but at the cost of a higher complication rate, particularly hyphema. Goniotomy offers a more moderate reduction in IOP with the added benefit of reducing dependence on glaucoma medications. These insights can help inform personalized surgical decision-making, ensuring that the choice of procedure aligns with each patient’s individual clinical profile and treatment goals. Ultimately, the choice between trabeculectomy and goniotomy may depend on each patient’s baseline IOP, disease severity, tolerance for certain topical medications and surgeon preference and experience.
Our study’s results also reinforce the need for longitudinal research comparing these surgical options, especially in assessing the sustainability of both medication reduction and IOP control. This can help further clarify parameters and help identify certain characteristics that indicate a patient may benefit from a MIGS procedure over a trabeculectomy. Glaucoma’s chronic, progressive nature means that the benefits of initial surgical management may wane over time, and the medication requirements of patients can continue to evolve. Multicenter, prospective studies with extended follow-up would help clarify whether early differences in medication burden translate into differences in visual field preservation, quality of life, and cost effectiveness. Incorporating patient-reported outcomes and economic analyses into future research would help further strengthen the evidence base, thus enabling more patient-centered discussions and informed surgical decisions.

Author Contributions

S.K. methodology, data curation, formal analysis, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; J.S.J. conceptualization, methodology, project administration, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of South Florida (Approval code: STUDY006689, approval date: 3 May 2025).

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author due to privacy restrictions.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Ehrlich, J.R.; Burke-Conte, Z.; Wittenborn, J.S.; Saaddine, J.; Omura, J.D.; Friedman, D.S.; Flaxman, A.D.; Rein, D.B. Prevalence of Glaucoma Among US Adults in 2022. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2024, 142, 1046–1053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Dietze, J.; Blair, K.; Zeppieri, M.; Havens, S.J. Glaucoma. In StatPearls; StatPearls Publishing: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2024. [Google Scholar]
  3. Tham, Y.C.; Li, X.; Wong, T.Y.; Quigley, H.A.; Aung, T.; Cheng, C.Y. Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology 2014, 121, 2081–2090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Singh, K.; Singh, A.; Jain, D.; Verma, V. Factors affecting adherence to glaucoma medication: Patient perspective from North India. Indian J. Ophthalmol. 2024, 72, 391–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Quaranta, L.; Novella, A.; Tettamanti, M.; Pasina, L.; Weinreb, R.N.; Nobili, A. Adherence and Persistence to Medical Therapy in Glaucoma: An Overview. Ophthalmol. Ther. 2023, 12, 2227–2240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Oltramari, L.; Mansberger, S.L.; Souza, J.M.P.; de Souza, L.B.; de Azevedo, S.F.M.; Abe, R.Y. The association between glaucoma treatment adherence with disease progression and loss to follow-up. Sci. Rep. 2024, 14, 2195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Moore, S.G.; Richter, G.; Modjtahedi, B.S. Factors Affecting Glaucoma Medication Adherence and Interventions to Improve Adherence: A Narrative Review. Ophthalmol. Ther. 2023, 12, 2863–2880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Inoue, K. Managing adverse effects of glaucoma medications. Clin Ophthalmol. 2014, 8, 903–913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. McClelland, J.F.; Bodle, L.; Little, J.A. Investigation of medication adherence and reasons for poor adherence in patients on long-term glaucoma treatment regimes. Patient Prefer. Adherence 2019, 13, 431–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Sharma, A.; Tijerina, J.D.; Bitrian, E. Minimally invasive, maximally impactful: Minimally invasive glaucoma surgery and the changing glaucoma landscape. Curr. Opin. Ophthalmol. 2024, 35, 409–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ang, B.C.H.; Lim, S.Y.; Betzler, B.K.; Wong, H.J.; Stewart, M.W.; Dorairaj, S. Recent Advancements in Glaucoma Surgery-A Review. Bioengineering 2023, 10, 1096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Rulli, E.; Biagioli, E.; Riva, I.; Gambirasio, G.; De Simone, I.; Floriani, I.; Quaranta, L. Efficacy and safety of trabeculectomy vs nonpenetrating surgical procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2013, 131, 1573–1582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. King, A.J.; Hudson, J.; Fernie, G.; Kernohan, A.; Azuara-Blanco, A.; Burr, J.; Homer, T.; Shabaninejad, H.; Sparrow, J.M.; Garway-Heath, D. Primary trabeculectomy for advanced glaucoma: Pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial (TAGS). BMJ 2021, 373, n1014, Correction in BMJ. 2021, 25, n1337. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1337. Correction in BMJ. 2021, 373, n1510. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Gurnani, B.; Tripathy, K. Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery. In StatPearls; StatPearls Publishing: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  15. Sieck, E.G.; Epstein, R.S.; Kennedy, J.B.; SooHoo, J.R.; Pantcheva, M.B.; Patnaik, J.L.; Wagner, B.D.; Lynch, A.M.; Kahook, M.Y.; Seibold, L.K. Outcomes of Kahook Dual Blade Goniotomy with and without Phacoemulsification Cataract Extraction. Ophthalmol. Glaucoma 2018, 1, 75–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Zaifar, A.; Pratomo, T.G.; Suryono, A.N. Comparison between MIGS with trabeculectomy in the management of open-angle glaucoma with cataract: A systematic review. Indian J. Ophthalmol. 2024, 72 (Suppl. 3), S345–S353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. ElMallah, M.K.; Berdahl, J.P.; Williamson, B.K.; Dorairaj, S.K.; Kahook, M.Y.; Gallardo, M.J.; Mahootchi, A.; Smith, S.N.; Rappaport, L.A.; Diaz-Robles, D.; et al. Twelve-Month Outcomes of Stand-Alone Excisional Goniotomy in Mild to Severe Glaucoma. Clin. Ophthalmol. 2020, 14, 1891–1897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Agrawal, P.; Bradshaw, S.E. Systematic Literature Review of Clinical and Economic Outcomes of Micro-Invasive Glaucoma Surgery (MIGS) in Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma. Ophthalmol. Ther. 2018, 7, 49–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Radcliffe, N. The case for standalone micro-invasive glaucoma surgery: Rethinking the role of surgery in the glaucoma treatment paradigm. Curr. Opin. Ophthalmol. 2023, 34, 138–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Gillmann, K.; Mansouri, K. Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery: Where Is the Evidence? Asia Pacific J. Ophthalmol. 2020, 9, 203–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Berdahl, J.P.; Gallardo, M.J.; ElMallah, M.K.; Williamson, B.K.; Kahook, M.Y.; Mahootchi, A.; Rappaport, L.A.; Lazcano-Gomez, G.S.; Díaz-Robles, D.; Dorairaj, S.K. Six-Month Outcomes of Goniotomy Performed with the Kahook Dual Blade as a Stand-Alone Glaucoma Procedure. Adv. Ther. 2018, 35, 2093–2102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Baumgarten, S.; Plange, N.; Htoon, H.M.; Lohmann, T.; Videa, A.; Koutsonas, A.; Schellhase, H.; Kuerten, D.; Walter, P.; Fuest, M. Outcomes of combined single-use dual blade goniotomy and cataract surgery. Int. Ophthalmol. 2022, 42, 2685–2696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Wagner, I.V.; Boopathiraj, N.; Lentz, C.; Dorairaj, E.A.; Draper, C.; Kumar, D.; Checo, L.; Miller, D.D.; Krambeer, C.; Dorairaj, S. Long-Term Efficacy of Successful Excisional Goniotomy with the Kahook Dual Blade. Clin. Ophthalmol. 2024, 18, 713–721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Boopathiraj, N.; Wagner, I.V.; Lentz, P.C.; Draper, C.; Krambeer, C.; Abubaker, Y.S.; Ang, B.C.H.; Miller, D.D.; Dorairaj, S. 36-Month Outcomes of Standalone Kahook Dual Blade Goniotomy Compared with Ab-Interno Closed Conjunctiva Xen Gel Stent Implantation. Clin. Ophthalmol. 2024, 18, 2593–2603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Wagner, F.M.; Schuster, A.K.; Kianusch, K.; Stingl, J.; Pfeiffer, N.; Hoffmann, E.M. Long-term success after trabeculectomy in open-angle glaucoma: Results of a retrospective cohort study. BMJ Open 2023, 13, e068403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Almatlouh, A.; Bach-Holm, D.; Kessel, L. Steroids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the postoperative regime after trabeculectomy—Which provides the better outcome? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Ophthalmol. 2019, 97, 146–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Panarelli, J.F.; Nayak, N.V.; Sidoti, P.A. Postoperative management of trabeculectomy and glaucoma drainage implant surgery. Curr. Opin. Ophthalmol. 2016, 27, 170–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Binibrahim, I.H.; Bergström, A.K. The role of trabeculectomy in enhancing glaucoma patient’s quality of life. Oman J. Ophthalmol. 2017, 10, 150–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Rowson, A.C.; Hogarty, D.T.; Maher, D.; Liu, L. Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery: Safety of Individual Devices. J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11, 6833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Balas, M.; Mathew, D.J. Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery: A Review of the Literature. Vision 2023, 7, 54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Rao, A.; Cruz, R.D. Trabeculectomy: Does It Have a Future? Cureus 2022, 14, e27834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Taube, A.B.; Niemelä, P.; Alm, A. Trabeculectomy with an active postoperative regimen: Results and resource utilization. Acta Ophthalmol. 2009, 87, 524–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Yuan, P.H.S.; Dorling, M.; Shah, M.; Panarelli, J.F.; Durr, G.M. Combined Microinvasive Glaucoma Surgery With Phacoemulsification in Open-Angle Glaucoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 2025, 270, 154–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Kojima, S.; Inatani, M.; Shobayashi, K.; Haga, A.; Inoue, T.; Tanihara, H. Risk factors for hyphema after trabeculectomy with mitomycin C. J. Glaucoma 2014, 23, 307–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Yook, E.; Vinod, K.; Panarelli, J.F. Complications of micro-invasive glaucoma surgery. Curr. Opin. Ophthalmol. 2018, 29, 147–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Ramona, B.; Monica, P.; Paul-Eduard, S.; Speranta, S.; Calin-Petru, T. Intraoperative and postoperative complications in trabeculectomy, Clinical study. Rom. J. Ophthalmol. 2015, 59, 243–247. [Google Scholar]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Journal Statistics
Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Download PDF
Incidence and Outcomes of Dropped Nucleus After Phacoemulsification Cataract Surgery Between 2020 and 2024
Previous