This study aims to conduct an analysis glaucoma surgeries performed over a 13-year period at a tertiary hospital affiliated with the Spanish National Health System, with the goal of assessing temporal trends.
Methods
This retrospective observational study scrutinized surgeries undertaken in the glaucoma unit of a tertiary center in Spain between 2010 and 2022. Data collected included surgical dates, procedure performed, whether it was standalone or combined, as well as patient demographics including age, sex, and type of underlying glaucoma. Surgeries on individuals under 18 years of age were excluded. An annual comparative analysis was performed to ascertain the evolving trends in glaucoma surgical interventions.
Results
A total of 12,944 surgeries were included in the analysis, comprising 9428 isolated cataract surgeries and 2975 glaucoma procedures. Trabeculectomy, glaucoma drainage devices (GDD), and cyclodestruction, collectively referred to as traditional surgery, demonstrated a decline from 93.2% to 23.6% over the study duration. Minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) and minimally invasive bleb surgery (MIBS) demonstrated a significant increase from 3.8% in 2010 to 74.7% in 2022, relative to the total glaucoma surgeries. Furthermore, combined surgeries manifested a noteworthy increase from 39.0% in 2010 to 44.2% in 2022, with 86.4% of combined procedures in 2022 being MIGS or MIBS.
Conclusion
In recent years, there has been a noticeable change in the trend of glaucoma surgeries, with MIGS and MIBS procedures experiencing a significant increase and becoming the most commonly performed glaucoma procedures. Consequently, traditional glaucoma surgeries have decreased in frequency.
BourneRRASteinmetzJD, et al.Causes of blindness and vision impairment in 2020 and trends over 30 years, and prevalence of avoidable blindness in relation to VISION 2020: the right to sight: an analysis for the global burden of disease study. Lancet Glob Health [Internet]2021 Feb 1 [cited 2023 Jul 2]; 9: e144–e160. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33275949/.
2.
Gallo AfflittoGAielloFCesareoM, et al.Primary open angle glaucoma prevalence in Europe: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Glaucoma2022 Oct; 31: 783–788.
3.
ThamYCLiXWongTY, et al.Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040. Ophthalmology2014 Nov; 121: 2081–2090.
4.
WeinrebRNAungTMedeirosFA. The pathophysiology and treatment of glaucoma. JAMA2014 May 14; 311: 1901.
5.
StorgaardLTranTLFreibergJC, et al.Glaucoma Clinical Research: Trends in Treatment Strategies and Drug Development. Front Med (Lausanne)2021 Sep 13; 8: 733080.
6.
MarshallLLHayslettRLStevensGA. Therapy for open-angle glaucoma. Consult Pharm2018 Aug 1; 33: 432–445.
7.
GazzardGKonstantakopoulouEGarway-HeathD, et al.Laser in glaucoma and ocular hypertension (LiGHT). Trial. Ophthalmology2023 Feb; 130: 139–151.
8.
European glaucoma society terminology and guidelines for glaucoma, 5th edition. Br J Ophthalmol2021 Jun 21; 105: 1–169.
KirwanJFLockwoodAJShahP, et al.Trabeculectomy in the 21st century: a multicenter analysis. Ophthalmology2013 Dec; 120: 2532–2539.
11.
GeddeSJHerndonLWBrandtJD, et al.Postoperative complications in the tube versus trabeculectomy (TVT) study during five years of follow-up. Am J Ophthalmol2012 May 1; 153: 814.e1.
12.
GeddeSJFeuerWJLimKS, et al.Postoperative complications in the primary tube versus trabeculectomy study during 5 years of follow-up. Ophthalmology2022 Dec 1; 129: 1357–1367.
13.
RulliEBiagioliERivaI, et al.Efficacy and safety of trabeculectomy vs nonpenetrating surgical procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Ophthalmol2013 Dec; 131: 1573–1582.
14.
RowsonACHogartyDTMaherD, et al.Minimally invasive glaucoma surgery: safety of individual devices. J Clin Med2022 Nov 18; 11: 6833. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11226833
PereiraICFvan de WijdevenRWyssHM, et al.Conventional glaucoma implants and the new MIGS devices: a comprehensive review of current options and future directions. Eye2021 Dec 14; 35: 3202–3221.
17.
BalasMMathewDJ. Minimally invasive glaucoma surgery: a review of the literature. Vision2023 Aug 21; 7: 54.
18.
SaeedEGołaszewskaKDmuchowskaDA, et al.The PreserFlo MicroShunt in the context of minimally invasive glaucoma surgery: a narrative review. Int J Environ Res Public Health2023 Feb 7; 20: 2904.
19.
MerciecaK. Comparison of glaucoma drainage implants. Die Ophthalmologie2023 Apr 25; 120: 372–377.
20.
GuptaSJeriaS. A review on glaucoma drainage devices and its complications. Cureus2022 Sep 12; 14: e29072. doi: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.29072
21.
De GregorioAPedrottiEStevanG, et al.XEN Glaucoma treatment system in the management of refractory glaucomas: a short review on trial data and potential role in clinical practice. Clinical Ophthalmology2018 Apr; 12: 773–782.
22.
Burgos-BlascoBGarcía-FeijóoJGines-GallegoC, et al.Efficacy and safety of the PreserFlo implant with mitomycin C in childhood glaucoma after previous failed glaucoma surgeries. Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology2023 May 20; 261: 1349–1357.
23.
MajouletAScemlaBHamardP, et al.Safety and efficacy of the Preserflo® Microshunt in refractory glaucoma: a one-year study. J Clin Med2022 Dec 1; 11: 7086.
24.
KingAJHudsonJAzuara-BlancoA, et al.Evaluating primary treatment for people with advanced glaucoma. Ophthalmology2024 Jul; 131: 759–770.
25.
ChiselitaD. Non-penetrating deep sclerectomy versus trabeculectomy in primary open-angle glaucoma surgery. Eye2001 Mar; 15: 197–201.
26.
BouillotAPierruABlumen-OhanaE, et al.Changes in choroidal thickness and optic nerve head morphology after filtering surgery: nonpenetrating deep sclerectomy versus trabeculectomy. BMC Ophthalmol2019 Dec 21; 19: 24.
27.
QiaoCZhangHCaoK, et al.Changing trends in glaucoma surgery over the past 5 years in China. J Glaucoma2022 May 1; 31: 329–334.
28.
LuebkeJBoehringerDAntonA, et al.Trends in surgical glaucoma treatment in Germany between 2006 and 2018. Clin Epidemiol2021 Jul; 13: 581–592.
29.
LuebkeJBöhringerDEversC, et al.Glaucoma treatment in German hospitals in 2019. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd2023 Jan 23; 240: 86–91.
30.
MurphyCOgstonSCobbC, et al.Recent trends in glaucoma surgery in Scotland, England and Wales. Br J Ophthalmol2015 Mar; 99: 308–312.
31.
SzigiatoAATropeGEJinY, et al.Trends in glaucoma surgical procedures in Ontario: 1992–2012. Can J Ophthalmol2015 Oct; 50: 338–344.
32.
Azuara-BlancoABurrJRamsayC, et al.Effectiveness of early lens extraction for the treatment of primary angle-closure glaucoma (EAGLE): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet2016 Oct 1; 388: 1389–1397.
33.
SlabaughMAChenPP. The effect of cataract extraction on intraocular pressure. Curr Opin Ophthalmol2014 Mar; 25: 122–126.
34.
WangSYAzadADLinSC, et al.Intraocular pressure changes after cataract surgery in patients with and without glaucoma. Ophthalmol Glaucoma2020 Sep; 3: 343–349.
35.
KalarnSLeTRheeDJ. The role of trabeculectomy in the era of minimally invasive glaucoma surgery. Curr Opin Ophthalmol2022 Mar; 33: 112–118.
36.
BicketAKLeJTAzuara-BlancoA, et al.Minimally invasive glaucoma surgical techniques for open-angle glaucoma. JAMA Ophthalmol2021 Sep 1; 139: 983.
37.
WagnerIVStewartMWDorairajSK. Updates on the diagnosis and management of glaucoma. Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes2022 Dec; 6: 618–635.
TeusMABeldaJILavínC, et al.Cost-effectiveness analysis of iStent Inject® implantation during cataract surgery compared to cataract surgery alone for mild to moderate open-angle glaucoma patients in Spain. Expert Rev Ophthalmol2021 Jul 4; 16: 319–328.
40.
Ontario Health (Quality). iStent for adults with glaucoma: a health technology assessment. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser2021; 21: 1–42.
41.
SchlenkerMBGulamhuseinHConrad-HengererI, et al.Efficacy, safety, and risk factors for failure of standalone ab interno gelatin microstent implantation versus standalone trabeculectomy. Ophthalmology2017 Nov; 124: 1579–1588.
42.
BatlleJFCoronaAAlbuquerqueR. Long-term results of the PRESERFLO MicroShunt in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma from a single-center nonrandomized study. J Glaucoma2021 Mar; 30: 281–286.
43.
BeckersHJMAptelFWebersCAB, et al.Safety and effectiveness of the PRESERFLO® MicroShunt in primary open-angle glaucoma. Ophthalmol Glaucoma2022 Mar; 5: 195–209.
44.
WakudaHNakakuraSShojoT. Comparative analysis of surgical durations and fees across eight types of glaucoma surgery performed by a single surgeon. Cureus2024 Jan 4; 16: e51675.
45.
Van LanckerLSaravananAAbu-BakraM, et al.Clinical outcomes and cost analysis of PreserFlo versus trabeculectomy for glaucoma management in the United Kingdom. Ophthalmol Glaucoma2023 Jul; 6: 342–357.
46.
FangCEHMathewRGKhawPT, et al.Corneal endothelial cell density loss after glaucoma surgery alone or in combination with cataract surgery. Ophthalmology2022 Aug; 129: 841–855.
47.
Ibarz-BarberáMMorales-FernándezLCorroto-CuadradoA, et al.Corneal endothelial cell loss after PRESERFLOTM MicroShunt implantation in the anterior chamber: anterior segment OCT tube location as a risk factor. Ophthalmol Ther2022 Feb 26; 11: 293–310.
48.
de las MatasRBSSuch-IrustaLAlfonso-MuñozEA, et al.Late-onset endophthalmitis after XEN45® implantation: a retrospective case series and literature review. J Curr Glaucoma Pract2022 Jan 27; 15: 153–160.
49.
ReissGCliffordBVoldS, et al.Safety and effectiveness of CyPass supraciliary micro-stent in primary open-angle glaucoma: 5-year results from the COMPASS XT study. Am J Ophthalmol2019 Dec; 208: 219–225.
