Ten-Year Clinical Outcomes of Acute Primary Angle Closure Randomized to Receive Early Phacoemulsification Versus Laser Peripheral Iridotomy.

PURPOSE

To compare the 10-year clinical outcomes of eyes with acute primary angle closure (APAC) randomized to receive either early phacoemulsification or laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI).

METHODS

Sixty-two APAC patients, who underwent either early phacoemulsification (phaco group) or laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI group) in a previous randomized controlled trial, were invited for assessment 10 years after the interventions. The results of the 2 groups were compared.

RESULTS

Forty of 62 patients (64.5%; 19 in phaco group and 21 from LPI group) were examined. None of them underwent additional glaucoma procedure but 15 (71.4%) patients in the LPI group received lens extraction before this assessment. The mean follow-up duration was 10.7±0.7 years. The phaco group used less medication (0.16±0.37 vs. 0.76±1.09 bottle per eye, P=0.028), had less extensive anterior synechiae (120.0±116.12 vs. 244.3±139.8 degree, P=0.010), and greater mean Shaffer gonioscopy grading (1.79±0.84 vs. 1.40±0.87; P=0.021) than the LPI group. Five eyes had persistent intraocular pressure elevation of >21 mm Hg in 2 consecutive visits and 4 eyes had blindness (best-corrected visual acuity worse than 6/60 and/or central visual field of <20 degree) in the LPI group, compared with none in the phaco group (P=0.022 and 0.045, respectively). There was no significant difference in the mean intraocular pressure, best-corrected visual acuity, and the number of eyes with visual field progression.

CONCLUSION

At 10 years, APAC eyes that underwent early phacoemulsification required less medication, less peripheral anterior synechiae, lower incidence of intraocular pressure elevation and a lower incidence of blindness compared with APAC eyes that underwent initial LPI.