Aqueous shunts for glaucoma.

BACKGROUND

Aqueous shunts are employed for intraocular pressure (IOP) control in primary and secondary glaucomas that fail medical, laser, and other surgical therapies.

OBJECTIVES

This review compares aqueous shunts for IOP control and safety.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, NRR all in January 2006, LILACS to February 2004 and reference lists of included trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized and quasi-randomized trials in which one arm of the study involved shunts.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data for included studies and a third adjudicated discrepancies. We contacted investigators for missing information. We used fixed-effect models and summarized continuous outcomes using mean differences.

MAIN RESULTS

We included fifteen trials with a total of 1153 participants with mixed diagnoses. Five studies reported details sufficient to verify the method of randomization but only two had adequate allocation concealment. Data collection and follow-up times were variable.Meta-analysis of two trials comparing Ahmed implant with trabeculectomy found trabeculectomy resulted in lower mean IOPs 11 to 13 months later (mean difference 3.81 mm Hg, 95% CI 1.94 to 5.69 mm Hg). Meta-analysis of two trials comparing double-plate Molteno implant with the Schocket shunt was not done due to substantial heterogeneity. One study comparing ridged with standard double-plate Molteno implants found no clinically significant differences in outcome. Two trials investigating the effectiveness of adjunctive mitomycin (MMC) with the Molteno and Ahmed implants found no evidence of benefit with MMC. Two trials that investigated surgical technique variations with the Ahmed found no benefit with partial tube ligation or excision of Tenon's capsule. One study concluded there were outcome advantages with a double versus a single-plate Molteno implant and one trial comparing the 350 mm(2) and 500 mm(2) Baerveldt shunts found no clinically significant advantage of the larger device but neither of these trials included all patients randomized. One study suggested improved clinical outcome when MMC was employed with a newly described shunt including ultrasound supporting the conclusion. One small study did not demonstrate an outcome advantage to systemic steroid use postoperatively with single-plate Molteno shunts. One study comparing endocyclophotocoagulation (ECP) with Ahmed implant in complicated glaucomas found no evidence of better IOP control with Ahmed implant over ECP.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Relatively few randomized trials have been published on aqueous shunts and methodology and data quality among them is poor. To date there is no evidence of superiority of one shunt over another.