Trabs Versus Shunts
Chat Highlights
November 2, 2011
Steven Beck, Editor
On Wednesday, November 2, 2011, Dr.
Michael Pro, a glaucoma specialist at Wills, and the glaucoma
chat group discussed "Trabs Versus Shunts".
Moderator: Tonight's
topic is “Trabs Versus Shunts”.
Dr. Pro: Close
to my heart!
Moderator: Can you
start by describing each?
Dr. Pro: Sure.
I am sure that most of you are familiar with these surgeries.
Some may even have had them. Trabeculecomy as a surgical technique
was first described in the 1960s. The idea was to provide a safer
alternative to the glaucoma surgeries of that day. Those surgeries
would lead to high levels of complications like flat anterior
chambers and cataracts.
The trabeculectomy is essentially the creation of a new drainage
pathway for aqueous to pass from the anterior chamber to a space
under the conjunctiva (the bleb) from which it would leave the
eye. With a trabeculectomy, the defining feature is a scleral
flap that helps to modulate the outflow of aqueous and helps to
prevent complications such as a flat anterior chamber and hypotony
(IOP that is too low). Today we usually do trabeculectomies with
anti-scarring medicines like mitomycin C and 5-FU. These medicines
help to prevent early healing and fibrosis which can cause trabeculectomies
to fail.
P:
Why would either of these surgeries be used rather than one of
the more non-invasive surgeries currently available?
Dr. Pro:
Good question. First, many surgeons are not as familiar with the
non-penetrating surgeries. Second, the success of some of those
surgeries seems very surgeon and center dependent. Those surgeries
have a steeper learning curve. Third, tubes and trabs have a proven
track record of success
P:
Would you please tell us about “The Tube Versus Trabeculectomy
(TVT) Study?”
Dr. Pro:
Yes. This is a very important study that compared the surgical
results in patients who had tube shunts versus patients who had
trabs. This was a multi-center and randomized trial. In other
words, if a patient agreed to participate, he or she would be
randomized to get either a trab or a tube. The important finding
here was that tubes did as well as trabs in terms of final IOP
control at three years. But, the tubes needed more glaucoma medications
to achieve IOP control than the trabs. The trabs had more complications
in the post-operative period.
P:
How do the results of the TVT Study affect the treatment of glaucoma?
Dr. Pro:
That is interesting. I don't know yet. My feeling is that for
most surgeons, the results won't change their behavior much. You
see, the study didn't find one surgery to be superior to the other.
Also, one can always nitpick on aspects of the study design. In
general, if you have been treating glaucoma long enough, you may
see every complication from every surgery. I and most glaucoma
surgeons try to pick the best surgery for that particular patient.
P:
Does having one preclude having the other?
Dr. Pro:
No, although the usual course is to start with a trab and then
do a tube once that fails. Also the tube surgery usually causes
more conjunctival scarring and doing the trab can then be much
more difficult. It may, for instance some studies (but not all)
suggest a worse outcome for trabeculectomy in African Americans.
But perhaps more important is the type of glaucoma. Neovascular
and Inflammatory glaucoma are poor candidates for trabeculectomy
and usually do better with tube shunts.
P:
Was the Scheie sclerectomy an early form of a trab as my mom had
one in the early 1970s?
Dr. Pro:
Yes, the Scheie procedure was similar to the trab.
P:
What is the average effectiveness of each in term of years?
Dr. Pro:
Well, again this depends on the study and the amount of time that
the patients are followed. In general the success is about 80
percent and is similar to trabs and tubes.
P:
This is interesting. I think I heard that one can have repeat
trabs. Is this correct? Are there repeat tubes as well?
Dr. Pro:
Yes, indeed. In fact one can have as many as three trabs and up
to four tubes!
P:
What in your estimation is the length of time these procedures
remain effective for an uncomplicated patient?
Dr. Pro: Well,
since we have been talking about the tube versus trab study we
can point to that data to say that tubes are about 85 percent
successful at three years and trabs are about 70 percent successful.
Other studies have not been quite as negative regarding trabs
and show success at 80-85 percent as I have quoted before.
It is difficult to estimate longevity of surgical success. I have
many patients whose blebs have been going strong for years. Clinically
if the eye is quiet and the IOP has have well controlled, it will
continue in that manner.
The criticism of the trab data involves the fact that resident
surgeries were included in the study and the MMC application was
heavy. That having been said, the TVT is an important study.
Moderator: It's
half past doctor. Thank you once again.
Dr. Pro:
OK, great. Nice questions! Good night.
Click here for
upcoming glaucoma chat events.
|