Cyclocryotherapy versus transscleral diode laser cyclophotocoagulation for uncontrolled intraocular pressure

Nitza Goldenberg-Cohen*, Irit Bahar, Michal Ostashinski, Moshe Lusky, Dov Weinberger, Dan D. Gaton

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

58 Scopus citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To compare the use of cyclocryotherapy and diode laser cyclophotocoagulation for the treatment of uncontrolled intraocular pressure. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy consecutive patients (70 eyes) treated for high, unresponsive intraocular pressure during a 4-year period with cyclocryotherapy (n = 38) or diode laser cyclophotocoagulation (n = 32) with a follow-up period of at least 3 months (mean follow-up = 15.7 months) were compared for intraocular pressure, visual acuity, and complication rate. RESULTS: Mean intraocular pressure was reduced from 40.9 ± 11.9 to 20.5 ± 10.3 mm Hg in the cyclocryotherapy group, and from 35.9 ± 9.3 to 21.3 ± 10.7 mm Hg in the cyclophotocoagulation group. Intraocular pressure was controlled in 60.5% and 62.5% of eyes, respectively. Deterioration in visual acuity occurred in 31.5% of the cyclocryotherapy group and 37.5% of the cyclophotocoagulation group. Severe visual loss to no light perception was noted in 6 eyes and 2 eyes, respectively, and phthisis bulbi in 2 eyes in the cyclocryotherapy group (5.2%) and 1 eye in the cyclophotocoagulation group (3.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Cyclocryotherapy and diode laser cyclophotocoagulation are equally effective in decreasing intraocular pressure in patients with persistent uncontrolled glaucoma, with a lower rate of complications associated with diode laser cyclophotocoagulation.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)272-279
Number of pages8
JournalOphthalmic Surgery Lasers and Imaging
Volume36
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 2005

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Cyclocryotherapy versus transscleral diode laser cyclophotocoagulation for uncontrolled intraocular pressure'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this