Purpose. To compare ocular anatomy differences of lens subluxation between eyes with or without acute angle closure (AAC). Methods. This is a retrospective and case-control study. Sixty cases with mild lens subluxation were recruited. Among them, 30 eyes with acute angle closure were assigned to the AAC group and 30 eyes without AAC were assigned to the non-AAC group. The anterior segment was quantitatively evaluated by ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM). The axial length (AL) was measured with IOL Master. All patients underwent lens extraction surgery and were followed up for six months. Results. The history of blunt trauma accounted for 22 (73.3%) cases in the AAC group and 21 (70%) cases in the non-AAC group. Fifteen (50%) patients in the AAC group had iridotomy history, and high intraocular pressure recurred. The UBM analysis showed that the average central chamber depth of the affected eyes in the AAC group was 1.82 mm, which was significantly shallower than that in the fellow eyes (2.58 mm, P<0.05) or both eyes in the non-AAC group.Both eyes in the AAC group presented a shorter AL and shallower anterior chamber than the eyes in the non-AAC group. Conclusions. An asymmetrical anterior chamber between bilateral eyes is an important feature in lens subluxation-induced AAC. The crowded anterior chamber and shorter AL might be the anatomic basis for the eye with lens subluxation-induced AAC.
Background To compare the efficacy of Ex-PRESS implantation versus trabeculectomy combined with phacoemulsification. Methods A retrospective 12-month study on patients with coincident primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and cataract. The patients underwent combined phacoemulsification and Ex-PRESS implant (Phaco-ExPRESS, n = 35) or phacotrabeculectomy (Phaco-Trab, n = 35). The morphological structures of the filtering bleb were examined by slit-lamp, anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) and in vivo confocal microscopy (IVCM). Complete success was defined as postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) < 18 mmHg without the use of anti-glaucoma medication. Qualified success was defined as postoperative IOP < 18 mmHg with or without anti-glaucoma medications. The data were collected preoperatively and postoperatively at 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months. Results No significant difference in the variables such as age, IOP and perimetry was found between the groups of Phaco-ExPRESS and Phaco-Trab. At the one-year postoperative visit for filtering blebs, Phaco-ExPRESS increased the mean area of epithelial microcysts significantly from 0.10 ± 0.05 to 0.20 ± 0.09 μm2 per μm2, while Phaco-Trab decreased the mean area significantly from 0.08 ± 0.04 to 0.04 ± 0.06 μm2 per μm2. Notably, the hyperreflective dots detected by IVCM decreased by 84.9% in Phaco-ExPRESS but increased by 36.3% in Phaco-Trab. The hyperreflective dots were further identified as neutrophil- and monocyte-like cells. The number of these cells were negatively correlated with the microcysts area (r = − 0.7, P < 0.01) but positively associated with the grade of connective tissue (r = 0.5, P < 0.01). By creating different microstructural changes in the filtering blebs, Phaco-ExPRESS produced a higher complete success rate (84.9% vs. 41.2%, P < 0.01) and significant decrease in the number of anti-glaucoma medications (P < 0.01) when compared with those in Phaco-Trab. However, the qualified success showed no significant difference between the two groups (100.0% vs. 91.2%, P = 0.24). Conclusions At the one-year follow-up, Phaco-ExPRESS generated better filtering bleb with larger area of microcysts, looser connective tissues, and less inflammation than that of Phaco-Trab, providing adequate IOP control and less IOP-lowering medications. These findings indicate that Phaco-ExPRESS could be more preferred than Phaco-Trab for the treatment of patients with coincident POAG and cataract.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.