Glaucoma drainage device implantation with adjunctive intravitreal bevacizumab in neovascular glaucoma: 3-year experience

Figures & data

Table 1 Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics of the two study groups

	Control group (n=30)	IVB group (n=9)	P-value
Age (years)	55.5±15.8	52.5±16.3	0.64a
Sex, n (%)
Male	16 (53.3%)	4 (44.4%)	0.72b
Female	14 (46.7%)	5 (55.6%)
Etiology, n (%)
Diabetic retinopathy	17 (56.7%)	6 (66.7%)	1.00b
Retinal vein occlusion	4 (13.3%)	1 (11.1%)
Others	9 (30.0%)	2 (22.2%)
Implant type, n (%)
Ahmed glaucoma valve	13 (43.3%)	5 (55.6%)	0.89b
Baerveldt implant	10 (33.3%)	2 (22.2%)
Keiki Mehta implant	7 (23.3%)	2 (22.2%)
Follow-up period (months)	9.0 (4.0–37.0)	15.0 (4.0–37.0)	0.33c
Initial visual acuity (logMAR)	2.3 (0.2–3.0)	2.3 (0.5–3.0)	0.74c
Initial IOP (mmHg)	49.3±14.7	45.1±13.0	0.42a
Initial number of medications	2.0 (2.0–3.0)	2.0 (2.0–3.0)	0.43c

Notes: Data presented as mean ± standard deviation or median (min-max) according to the distribution of the data.

a Student’s t-test;

b Fisher’s exact test;

c Mann–Whitney test.

Abbreviations: IVB, intravitreal bevacizumab; IOP, intraocular pressure; SD, standard deviation.

Table 2 Comparison of final postoperative clinical conditions between the two groups

	Control group (n=30)	IVB group (n=9)	P-value
Final visual acuity (logMAR)	2.6 (0.2–4.0)	2.3 (0.4–4.0)	0.97a
Final IOP (mmHg)	16.3±10.3	12.0 (2.0–49.0)	0.40a
Final number of medications	1.0 (0–4.0)	1.0 (0–2.0)	0.57a
Success rate, n (%)
Success	17 (56.7%)	6 (66.7%)	0.71b
Failure	13 (43.3%)	3 (33.3%)

Notes: Data presented as mean ± standard deviation or median (min-max) according to the distribution of the data.

a Mann–Whitney test;

b Fisher’s exact test.

Abbreviations: IVB, intravitreal bevacizumab; IOP, intraocular pressure.

Table 3 Comparison of preoperative and postoperative clinical conditions within each group

	Control group (n=30)			IVB group (n=9)
	Initial	Final	P-value	Initial	Final	P-value
Final visual acuity (logMAR)	2.3 (0.2–3.0)	2.6 (0.2–4.0)	<0.01a	2.3 (0.5–3.0)	2.3 (0.4–4.0)	0.24a
Final IOP (mmHg)	49.3±14.7	16.3±10.3	<0.01b	45.1±13.0	12.0 (2.0–49.0)	0.01a
Final number of medications	2.0 (2.0–3.0)	1.0 (0–4.0)	<0.01a	2.0 (2.0–3.0)	1.0 (0–2.0)	<0.01a

Notes: Data presented as mean ± standard deviation or median (min-max) according to the distribution of the data. Data in bold indicates statistically significant difference between the two conditions (initial and final) of each group (control and IVB group).

a Wilcoxon test;

b paired t-test.

Abbreviations: IVB, intravitreal bevacizumab; IOP, intraocular pressure.

Figure 1 IOP distribution in control group (30 eyes, blue line) and IVB group (9 eyes, green line) at various follow-up periods.

Notes: IOP decreased at all time points compared with preoperative IOP in both groups. However, the differences of IOP between the groups were not statistically significant at any period. Error bars: 95% CI.
Abbreviations: IVB, intravitreal bevacizumab; IOP, intraocular pressure; GDD, glaucoma drainage device; CI, confidence interval.

Figure 2 Cumulative probability of success after surgery in IVB group (9 eyes, green line) and control group (30 eyes, blue line) using Kaplan–Meier survival curve analysis.

Note: Log-rank test revealed no significant difference in the survival time between groups.
Abbreviation: IVB, intravitreal bevacizumab.