Efficacy of Intravitreal Bevacizumab With Panretinal Photocoagulation Followed by Ahmed Valve Implantation in Neovascular Glaucoma

Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Sharkeya, Egypt.
Journal of glaucoma (Impact Factor: 2.11). 07/2012; 22(9). DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e318259aec4
Source: PubMed


To establish the efficacy and safety of intravitreal bevacizumab (Avastin) with panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) followed by Ahmed valve implantation in the treatment of neovascular glaucoma (NVG).

This prospective randomized study included 40 eyes of 40 patients with refractory NVG. Twenty eyes underwent Ahmed valve implantation with intravitreal bevacizumab (Avastin) (1.25 mg in 0.5 mL) and PRP and 20 eyes were managed by Ahmed valve and PRP (control group). The follow-up period was 18 months.

Complete success was defined as an intraocular pressure ≤ 21 mm Hg. Qualified success was considered when the above criteria were fulfilled but with additions of antiglaucoma topical medical treatment. The results revealed 95% total success (75% complete success and 20% qualified success) in the first group in which Avastin-augmented Ahmed valve was performed compared with 50% total success in the control group in which Ahmed valve implantation was performed alone (25% complete success and 25% qualified success).

Intravitreal bevacizumab (Avastin) with PRP followed by Ahmed valve implantation appears to be effective in the management of NVG.

1 Follower
15 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Neovascular glaucoma is a refractory glaucoma associated with a significant risk of blindness. The first line of treatment is ablation of retina to lessen retinal ischemia. The combination of bevacizumab and panretinal photocoagulation is effective in preventing progression of neovascular glaucoma. The adjunctive use of bevacizumab also reduces the risk of postoperative hyphema after filtering surgery. Prior vitrectomy in these eyes more frequently results in bleb failure after trabeculectomy. Advances in minimally invasive vitreous surgery reduce conjunctival scar formation, which can be beneficial if further filtering surgery is required. Pars plana implantation of glaucoma drainage devices is also an option for the reduction of intraocular pressure in vitrectomized eyes with neovascular glaucoma.
    Expert Review of Ophthalmology 01/2014; 9(1). DOI:10.1586/17469899.2014.879825
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Aim: To explore the efficacy of preoperative intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injection combined with Ahmed glaucoma valve (AGV) implantation in the treatment of neovascular glaucoma (NVG). Methods: This retrospective study included 35 eyes from 35 patients who underwent preoperative IVB and AGV implantation for treatment of NVG. Findings such as intraocular pressure (IOP) number of anti-glaucoma medications, visual acuity (VA), surgical success rates, and complications were recorded. Results: After AGV implantation, IOP was 18.2±4.0 mm Hg, 15.5±3.3 mm Hg and 9.8±2.6 mm Hg at 6, 12 and 36mo, significantly decreased compared with pre-IOP (P<0.01). The number of anti-glaucoma medications was 0.9±0.5, 0.8±0.9 and 0.8±0.6 at 6, 12 and 36mo, significantly decreased compared to pre-treatment (P<0.01). At last visit, there were 19 eyes with stable VA, 4 with VA improvement, 12 with diminished VA and 3 with complete loss light perception. There were 7 cases that failed during 3-year fellow up period. Cumulative probabilities of valve survival by Kaplan-Meier analysis were 82.9%, 74.1% and 71.0% at 12, 24 and 36mo, respectively. Cox stepwise regression analysis found that the survival time was significant associated with the pre-visual acuity <2/400 (P<0.05). Post-operative complications occurred in 8 eyes, of which hyphema presented in 2 eyes, choroidal effusion in 2 eyes. Conclusion: The procedure of preoperative IVB and AGV implantation should be one of treatments for NVG because of its safety and effectiveness.
    International Journal of Ophthalmology 10/2014; 7(5):837-42. DOI:10.3980/j.issn.2222-3959.2014.05.18 · 0.12 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: We evaluated the effects of adjuvant intravitreal bevacizumab injection on the outcomes of Ahmed glaucoma valve (AGV) implantation in patients with neovascular glaucoma (NVG) through a systematic literature review. Methods: An extensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was performed in November 2014 for selection of relevant studies. The weighted mean difference of the percentage of intraocular pressure reduction (IOPR%) from baseline to endpoint was used as the primary efficacy estimate, and Mantel-Haenszel odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the success rate were used as the secondary efficacy estimates. The incidence of adverse events was also documented through a review of the studies. Results: Six studies involving 252 patients (256 eyes) were included in this systematic review. The differences in the means and 95% CIs of the IOPR% of 6 studies showed that adjuvant bevacizumab treatment tended to be more effective than AGV implantation alone. Comparison of the outcomes of AGV implantation only with those of AGV implantation+adjuvant bevacizumab showed a success rate in favor of AGV implantation+adjuvant bevacizumab. The incidence of bleeding-associated complications such as hyphema, vitreous hemorrhage, and suprachoroidal hemorrhage was lower in association with combination treatment than with AGV implantation only. Combination treatment seemed to be associated with a lower incidence of other adverse effects such as hypotony, flat chamber, choroidal detachment/effusion, tube-associated complications, and corneal decompensation. Conclusion: AGV implantation with adjuvant bevacizumab was more effective and had a higher success rate than surgery alone for lowering IOP in patients with NVG. The combined procedure tended to show a lower incidence of bleeding-associated complications, such as hyphema.
    Journal of Ocular Pharmacology and Therapeutics 02/2015; 31(4). DOI:10.1089/jop.2014.0108 · 1.47 Impact Factor
Show more