Practice preferences for glaucoma drainage device implantation and cyclodestruction in Australia and New Zealand.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the practice patterns in the use of glaucoma drainage devices (GDD) and cyclodestruction among consultant ophthalmologists in Australia and New Zealand.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A 22-part questionnaire regarding GDD implantation and cyclodestruction practices was sent to all ophthalmologists registered with the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists in 2008 by post or e-mail.

RESULTS

Sixty-six percent of 872 questionnaires were returned, of these, 14% were from glaucoma subspecialists. Ten percent of all respondents performed GDD implantations. Molteno drains were the most popular device (69%). The most commonly recognized indications for GDD implantation were a history of 2 failed trabeculectomies (85%), neovascular glaucoma (71%), iridocorneal endothelial syndrome (55%), and uveitic glaucoma (52%). Only a minority of surgeons used intraoperative mitomycin C (38%) or 5-fluorouracil (26%) when implanting GDD. Cyclodestruction had been performed by 20% of all respondents. External diode cyclophotocoagulation was the most preferred treatment mode (73%). Sixty-seven percent treated 180 degrees of the ciliary body during initial treatment. Fifty-five percent treated only the earlier untreated area during retreatment. Only 11% of surgeons who performed cyclodestruction agreed that the indications for cyclodestruction are expanding.

CONCLUSIONS

A wide range of practice patterns for GDD implantation and cyclodestruction exist among Australian and New Zealand ophthalmologists. This likely reflects a paucity of good evidence to guide practice. The Australasian indications for GDD implantation were moderately different from the reported practice in America. Well-designed clinical trials are needed to better define the indications and best practice for these 2 important glaucoma treatment modalities.