|
 |
| LETTER TO THE EDITOR |
|
| Year : 2021 | Volume
: 69
| Issue : 1 | Page : 178-179 |
|
Comments on: Intraoperative injection versus sponge-applied mitomycin C during trabeculectomy: One-year study
Brenda Latsaheb, Prafulla Sarma, Shahinur Tayab, Chengchira Sangma
Sri Sankaradeva Nethralaya, Guwahati, Assam, India
| Date of Web Publication | 15-Dec-2020 |
Correspondence Address:
Dr. Brenda Latsaheb
Sri Sankaradeva Nethralaya, 96, Basistha Road, Guwahati - 781 028, Assam
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_967_20
How to cite this article:
Latsaheb B, Sarma P, Tayab S, Sangma C. Comments on: Intraoperative injection versus sponge-applied mitomycin C during trabeculectomy: One-year study. Indian J Ophthalmol 2021;69:178-9 |
How to cite this URL:
Latsaheb B, Sarma P, Tayab S, Sangma C. Comments on: Intraoperative injection versus sponge-applied mitomycin C during trabeculectomy: One-year study. Indian J Ophthalmol [serial online] 2021 [cited 2021 Jan 28];69:178-9. Available from: https://www.ijo.in/text.asp?2021/69/1/178/303353 |
Dear Editor,
We have read with great interest the article titled “Intraoperative injection versus sponge-applied mitomycin C during trabeculectomy: One-year study” by Maheshwari D et al.[1] published in the March 2020 issue of Indian Journal of Ophthalmology. We appreciate the authors for conducting this study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Intraoperative injection of MMC against conventional spongeapplied MMC during trabeculectomy. The authors concluded that injection of MMC may be as safe and effective as conventional sponge application of MMC with comparable estimated complete treatment success with relatively lower complication rates.
We would appreciate clarification on the following points:
- As was mentioned, the study included primary and secondary glaucoma cases undergoing trabeculectomy with MMC for IOP control. However, uveitic, neovascular, and traumatic glaucoma were excluded. We are interested to know the specific secondary glaucomas that were included in the study and the rationale for excluding the above-mentioned types of secondary glaucoma
- In the study, postoperative data prior to two weeks is not available and, thereby, we feel that we miss the opportunity to compare the difference in the rate of early postoperative complications between the two groups of patients
- As concluded in other similar studies, the major advantage of injectable MMC over sponge-applied MMC was the more favorable bleb morphology (more diffused, less vascularized, shallower bleb).[2],[3] We are interested in knowing the specifics of bleb morphology in both groups found in this study.
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
| References | |  |
| 1. | Maheshwari D, Kanduri S, Rengappa R, Kadar MA. Intraoperative injection versus sponge-applied mitomycin C during trabeculectomy: One-year study. Indian J Ophthalmol 2020;68:615-9.  [ PUBMED] [Full text] |
| 2. | Pakravan M, Esfandiari H, Yazdani S, Douzandeh A, Amouhashemi N, Yaseri M, et al. Mitomycin C-augmented trabeculectomy: Subtenon injection versus soaked sponges: A randomised clinical trial. Br J Ophthalmol 2017;101:1275-80. |
| 3. | Esfandiari H, Pakravan M, Yazdani S, Doozandeh A, Yaseri M, Conner IP. Treatment outcomes of mitomycin C-augmented trabeculectomy, sub-Tenon injection versus soaked sponges, after 3 years of follow-up. Ophthalmol Glaucoma 2018;1:66-74. |
|
.png "Santen")
Search Pubmed for