Outcomes of Anterior Chamber, Sulcus, and Pars Plana Glaucoma Drainage Device Placement in Glaucoma Patients
Table 8
Complication ratesa.
N
n (%)
AC inflammation
Hypotony
Corneal edema
Cystoid macular edema
Total
All groups
120
64 (53.3)
12 (10.0)
46 (38.3)
18 (15.0)
AC
40
20 (50.0)
6 (15.0)
11 (27.5)
5 (12.5)
S
40
33 (82.5)
5 (12.5)
24 (60.0)
6 (15.0)
PP
40
17 (42.5)
1 (2.5)
12 (30.0)
8 (20.0)
value
<0.001
0.149
0.005
0.741
Earlyb
All groups
120
64 (53.3)
12 (10.0)
46 (38.3)
18 (15.0)
AC
40
20 (50.0)
6 (15.0)
11 (27.5)
5 (12.5)
S
40
33 (82.5)
5 (12.5)
24 (60.0)
6 (15.0)
PP
40
16 (40.0)
1 (2.5)
12 (30.0)
8 (20.0)
value
<0.001
0.149
0.005
0.741
Latec
All groups
100
2 (2.0)
0 (0.0)
6 (6.0)
14 (14.0)
AC
36
1 (2.8)
0 (0.0)
4 (11.1)
7 (19.4)
S
33
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
4 (12.1)
PP
31
1 (3.2)
0 (0.0)
4 (12.9)
7 (22.6)
value
0.760
1.000
0.091
0.549
N = total number of patients at specific follow-up time; n = number of patients; AC = anterior chamber; S = sulcus; PP = pars plana. aComplication rates were compared across the three treatment groups using a Fisher test. bComplications present up to 3 months postoperatively. cComplications present after 3 months postoperatively.
