Discussion
In this study, ab externo TLO and ab interno TLO demonstrated a similar IOP lowering effect up to 12 months postoperatively. In other words, there were no significant differences in terms of success rate, mean IOP, IOP reduction rate or the changes in glaucoma drug score between the two groups.
Previous studies reported that ab externo TLO achieved mean postoperative IOPs ranging from 12.3 to 18.4 mm Hg,3–5 while Tanito et al showed that ab interno TLO had a mean postoperative IOP of 11.8±4.5 mm Hg at 9.5 months postoperatively.14 Compared with these reports, our present postoperative IOP at 1 year was higher in both procedures (ab externo TLO: 18.3±7.4 mm Hg, ab interno TLO: 17.8±6.3 mm Hg). We believe that the poorer effectiveness in this study was a result of the fact that our subjects included many patients who had used multiple glaucoma drugs for a long period and the fact that we applied the LOCF method to obtain our mean IOP, in which the values from patients with surgical failure were also included.
Although a propensity score adjustment was carried out, the preoperative glaucoma drug score in the ab interno TLO group (4.9±1.1) was significantly higher than that in the ab externo TLO group (4.3±1.4). We believe this is because the periods of prevalence for the two types of surgery were different. For example, during the ab externo TLO era, brimonidine and ripasudil were not available in Japan. Nevertheless, the postoperative drug score did not change between the two groups, indicating that ab interno TLO is, in fact, effective in reducing IOP.
Previous reports demonstrated that many confounding factors affect the surgical outcomes of TLO. Surgery involving elderly patients3 18 and concomitant cataract surgery7 8 10 19 generally had better outcomes. Meanwhile, some reported that exfoliation glaucoma patients showed better outcomes compared with POAG patients,3 while others found the opposite outcome.20 Steroid glaucoma was shown to have better results compared with POAG.5 Higher preoperative IOP was reported to result in lower surgical success rates.3 9 In addition, the history of previous glaucoma surgeries including laser surgery, which was excluded from the enrolment criteria in this study, had a negative impact.8 21
Given the various aforementioned factors that affect surgical outcomes, this study utilised propensity score analysis to minimise the effects of the confounding factors and to ensure the preoperative parameters were as comparable as possible between the two surgery groups. This analysis demonstrated a similar IOP lowering effect of ab interno TLO to that of ab externo TLO.
Note that our ab externo TLO included a DS procedure. DS has generally been regarded as stand-alone non-penetrating filtration surgery in Europe and the USA,22 23 while in Japan, DS has primarily been performed in conjunction with ab externo TLO, either to avoid the transiently elevated IOP after TLO4 10 or to enhance the IOP lowering effect of TLO.10 However, our results showed that DS did not have an additional IOP lowering effect and did not reduce the chance of transiently elevated IOP after ab externo TLO compared with ab interno TLO.
Few reports have compared the surgical outcomes of ab externo TLO and ab interno TLO in patients with adult glaucoma. Nakano et al demonstrated that ab externo TLO with DS tended to exhibit more IOP reduction after 3 years postoperatively compared with trabectome surgery, but the difference was not significant.10 Unlike ab interno TLO using the Tanito hook, ab interno trabeculectomy using the trabectome dissects and removes the trabecular meshwork, providing a potentially higher IOP lowering effect.
Tanito et al noted that the transiently elevated IOP after ab interno TLO, which was defined as more than 30 mm Hg in the early preoperative period, was 9%.14 Unexpectedly, the frequency of the transiently elevated IOP was not different between ab interno TLO and ab externo TLO. At the early postoperative stage of ab externo TLO, a small fraction of the aqueous humour is drained out of the eye beside the scleral flap,3 while ab interno TLO involves a completely water-tight procedure. In addition, since our ab externo TLO included DS, we expected to find a higher frequency of transiently elevated IOP in the ab interno TLO group. Trabectome surgery6–8 and ab interno TLO14 demonstrated a hyphema appearance rate ranging from 41% to 79.5%, which was comparable with that of ab externo TLO (90.1%).4 Because of the retrospective nature of this study, we counted the number of eyes with hyphema from medical charts only when they formed a niveau. Probably for this reason, the frequency of postoperative hyphema was much less than the previous reports, although more cases may have exhibited milder hyphema in our cohort. Collectively, the transiently elevated IOP after ab interno TLO will occur less than anticipated.
In this study, we found vitreous haemorrhage in three cases. All these patients had exfoliation glaucoma, in which blood in hyphema likely went down into vitreous cavity due to zonular dehiscence. Although, fortunately, hyphema and subsequent vitreous haemorrhage spontaneously subsided in the current cohorts, we sometimes experienced patients with severe hyphema and prolonged vitreous haemorrhage, in which additional surgical intervention such as anterior chamber irrigation and aspiration and pars plana vitrectomy was, rarely even emergently, required to reduce IOP or/and improve VA. As mentioned, two patients experienced VA reduction over 0.3 logMAR unit due to transient IOP elevation. Therefore, we must be aware of the risk of irreversible visual functional damage after TLO, whether ab externo or ab interno approaches, in glaucomatous eyes, particularly eyes with exfoliation glaucoma, with advanced stages. In relation to this, we also must note that approximately 20% of cases that underwent TLO, whether ab externo or ab interno approaches, required additional glaucoma surgeries.
There were no significant differences in preoperative and postoperative ECD between the two groups. However, despite the almost equal frequency of concomitant cataract surgeries in both groups, the ab interno TLO group showed a higher ECD reduction rate than the ab externo group (p<0.0001, Mann-Whitney U test). The more intraocular procedures involved in ab interno TLO may have contributed to this higher ECD reduction. However, the difference seemed to arise from the paradoxical increase in postoperative ECD with ab externo TLO, the reason for which is markedly unclear. Given the fairly low ECD reduction rate, the ab interno TLO is clinically acceptable, even from a safety point of view.
This study had several limitations. For one, while propensity score analysis is essentially a quasi-randomised experiment, it can minimise the known preoperative confounding factors to allow us to compare the causal effects16; unlike prospective randomised clinical trials, propensity score analysis is not able to randomise unknown confounding factors and loses some samples through the 1:1 matching analysis. Meanwhile, because a sample size was not calculated a priori, our result of there being no difference in surgical outcomes between the two groups does not confirm the authentic equivalence of ab interno TLO and ab externo TLO. Moreover, we could not precisely evaluate the postoperative anterior chamber haemorrhaging or peripheral anterior synechiae formation, which may have affected the outcomes. Finally, our study was a single-institution study involving only Japanese patients, and future research that includes other racial subjects in multiple facilities is required to confirm and generalise our pilot-study results.
In conclusion, the success rate at 12 months after surgery was not significantly different between ab externo and ab interno TLO. The reduction of IOP and the glaucoma drug scores in the two groups also showed no significant difference. Given the fact that it keeps the conjunctiva and sclera tissue free from damage and given the short surgery time involved, ab interno TLO is a promising method for reducing IOP in patients with early stage glaucoma.