May 2006
Volume 47, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2006
Ahmed Glaucoma Valve Implantation in Eyes With or Without Silicone Oil
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • P.A. Netland
    Department of Ophthamology, Univ of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN
  • K. Ishida
    Department of Ophthamology, Gifu Graduate University School of Medicine, Gifu, Japan
  • B. Khan
    University School of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
  • I.I. Ahmed
    University School of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  P.A. Netland, None; K. Ishida, None; B. Khan, None; I.I. Ahmed, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2006, Vol.47, 3548. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      P.A. Netland, K. Ishida, B. Khan, I.I. Ahmed; Ahmed Glaucoma Valve Implantation in Eyes With or Without Silicone Oil . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2006;47(13):3548.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Purpose: : To compare the results of Ahmed Glaucoma Valve implantation in eyes with silicone oil to those without silicone oil.

Methods: : In this retrospective comparative case–control study, we reviewed 68 eyes of 68 patients, comparing the surgical outcomes in eyes with silicone oil (N=34) to matched patients without silicone oil (N=34). Success was defined as intraocular pressure (IOP) of 6 mmHg and 21 mmHg, with or without the use of glaucoma medicines, without further glaucoma surgery, and without loss of light perception.

Results: : Average follow–up was 21 mo for silicone oil group and 24 mo for control (P=0.11). Mean IOP within 2 weeks postoperatively was significantly higher in the silicone oil group (P<0.05) and hypertensive phase within 6 mo was observed more frequently in the silicone group than in the control group (P<0.01). However, mean IOP at last follow–up was comparable between the 2 groups (15.1 7.3 mmHg in silicone oil group and 15.0 3.8 mmHg in control, P=0.60). The mean number of glaucoma medications was 1.2 1.2 and 1.6 1.3 (P=0.14) in silicone oil group and control, respectively, at the most recent follow–up. Cumulative probability of success by life–table analysis was 73% at 1 year, 66% at 2 yrs, and 44% at 4 yrs in silicone oil group, and 100% at 1 year, 89% at 2 yrs, and 67% at 4 yrs, respectively.(P=0.01). Complications were comparable between 2 groups (P>0.05). In 14 (43%) of 34 silicone treated eyes, silicone was observed adhering to the tube in the anterior chamber after surgery.

Conclusions: : Eyes treated with silicone oil have a poor prognosis for surgical success after Ahmed Glaucoma Valve implantation compared with eyes not treated with silicone oil.

Keywords: intraocular pressure • vitreoretinal surgery 

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.