Comparison of successful outcome predictors for MicroPulse^® laser trabeculoplasty and selective laser trabeculoplasty at 6 months

Figures & data

Table 1 Baseline demographic and glaucoma status data

	MLT (N=50)	SLT (N=50)	P-value
Age (years), mean ±SD	67.8±9.9	69.0±10.8	0.559
Gender, N (%)
Female	33 (66)	26 (52)	0.155
Male	17 (34)	24 (48)
Ethnicity, N (%)
Caucasian	41 (82)	47 (94)	0.271
Other	9 (18)	3 (6)
Glaucoma type, N (%)
Primary open angle	41 (82)	47 (94)	0.291
Secondary open angle	9 (18)	3 (6)
Severity, N (%)
Mild	20 (40)	22 (44)	0.511
Moderate	5 (10)	8 (16)
Severe	25 (50)	20 (40)
TM pigmentation
Light	39 (78)	40 (80)	0.806
Heavy	11 (22)	10 (20)
Number of laser shots, mean ±SD	130.2±25.3	84.6±19.2	<0.002*
Baseline IOP (mmHg), mean ±SD	18.3±5.09	17.3±4.83	0.453
Baseline medications, mean ±SD	2.52±1.31	2.13±1.30	0.893

Notes: Calculated by chi-square, Fisher’s exact, Student's t-test, and Mann–Whitney U. *Significant difference between both groups at an α of 0.05.

Abbreviations: MLT, MicroPulse^® laser trabeculoplasty; SLT, selective laser trabeculoplasty, Other ethnicities, Black and Hispanic; Secondary open-angle, traumatic, pseudoexfoliative and pigment dispersion; TM, trabecular meshwork.

Table 2 Predictive factors for MLT (N=50) and SLT (N=50) success at 6 months

	Laser trabeculoplasty		P-value
	MLT	SLT	MLT	SLT
Age (years), mean ±SD			0.154	0.013*
Success	70.2±11.7	73.7±11.8
Failure	65.9±8.0	65.9±9.1
Severity (successful cases), N (%)			0.585	0.583
Mild	10 (50.0)	9 (40.9)
Moderate	2 (40.0)	2 (25.0)
Severe	10 (40.0)	9 (45.0)
TM pigmentation (successful cases), N (%)			0.305	0.149
Light	19 (48.7)	18 (45.0)
Heavy	3 (27.3)	2 (20.0)
Number of laser shots, mean ±SD			0.031*	0.970
Success	122.6±20.8	84.9±17.4
Failure	136±27.16	84.5±20.6
Baseline IOP (mmHg), mean ±SD			0.983	0.035*
Success	19.0±3.1	19.8±3.8
Failure	18.5±3.9	16.9±5.2

Note: *Significant difference between both groups at an α of 0.05.

Abbreviations: MLT, MicroPulse^® laser trabeculoplasty; SLT, selective laser trabeculoplasty; TM, trabecular meshwork; IOP, intraocular pressure .

Table 3 IOP reduction at 6 months based on preoperative IOP level for MLT (N=50) and SLT (N=50)

Baseline IOP, mmHg	IOP Reduction (mmHg), mean ± SD (%)		P-value
	MLT	SLT
≤18 mmHg	0.9±3.4 (4.9)	−0.6±3.6 (−3.5)	0.131
>18 mmHg	3.4±4.3 (18.6)	5.2±8.3(30.1)	0.368
P-value	0.053	<0.002*
Baseline IOP, mmHg	Medication reduction (mmHg), mean ±SD (median [IQR])		P-value
	MLT	SLT
≤18 mmHg	0.0±1.0 (0[0.0])	0.2±0.9 (0[0.5])	0.688
>18 mmHg	0.3±1.4 (0[1.0])	−0.3±1.1 (0[1.0])	0.859
P-value	0.356	0.075

Note: *Significant difference between baseline IOP groups at α<0.05.

Abbreviations: MLT, MicroPulse^® laser trabeculoplasty; SLT, selective laser trabeculoplasty; IOP, intraocularpressure.

Figure 1 IOP reduction at 6 months based on preoperative IOP for MLT and SLT.

Abbreviations: MLT, MicroPulse^® laser trabeculoplasty; SLT, selective laser traveculoplasty; IOP, intraocular pressure.

Table 4 Comparative outcomes of MLT (N=50) and SLT (N=50) at 6 months

	MLT	SLT	P-value
Successes,^a N (%)	22 (44)	20 (40)	0.983
IOP reduction, mean ±SD (%)	2.1±4.1 (11.5)	1.8±6.6 (10.4)	0.773
Medication reduction, mean ±SD (median [IQR])	0.14±1.2 (0[1])	0.0±1.0 (0[0])	0.418

Notes: P-values calculated by chi-square, Student's t-test, and Mann-Whitney U test. ^aSuccess was defined as ≥20% IOP reduction or ≥1 medication reduction without additional IOP lowering procedures.

Abbreviations: MLT, MicroPulse^® laser trabeculoplasty; SLT, selective laser trabeculoplasty.