Back to Journals » Medical Devices: Evidence and Research » Volume 13

Comparison of Silicone- and Porous-Plate Ahmed Glaucoma Valves

Authors Roa TM, Netland PA, Costa VP, Sarkisian Jr SR, Al-Aswad LA, Moster MR, Ahmed IIK

Received 16 April 2020

Accepted for publication 22 June 2020

Published 16 July 2020 Volume 2020:13 Pages 213—221


Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 3

Editor who approved publication: Dr Scott Fraser

Tina M Roa,1 Peter A Netland,1 Vital P Costa,2 Steven R Sarkisian Jr,3 Lama A Al-Aswad,4 Marlene R Moster,5 Iqbal IK Ahmed6

1Department of Ophthalmology, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA 22908, USA; 2Department of Ophthalmology, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil; 3Oklahoma Eye Surgeons, PLLC, Oklahoma City, OK 73112, USA; 4Department of Ophthalmology, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY 10017, USA; 5Glaucoma Service, Wills Eye Hospital, Philadelphia, PA 19107, USA; 6Department of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

Correspondence: Peter A Netland
University of Virginia School of Medicine, PO Box 800715, Charlottesville, VA 22908, USA
Tel +1 434 982-1086

Purpose: Our aim was to evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes after implantation of the silicone-plate (model FP7) and porous polyethylene-plate (model M4) Ahmed Glaucoma Valves.
Patients and Methods: This was a prospective, multicenter, comparative series. A total of 52 eyes (52 patients) were treated with either the silicone or porous plate Ahmed Glaucoma Valve implant. Hypertensive phase was defined as intraocular pressure > 21 mmHg during the first 3 months postoperatively. Success was defined as 5 mmHg ≤intraocular pressure ≤ 21 mmHg (with or without additional glaucoma medications), without loss of light perception and without additional glaucoma procedures. Patients were monitored for 1 year after surgery.
Results: The pre-operative intraocular pressure was 29.9 ± 6.6 mmHg and 33.8 ± 10.5 in the silicone-plate and porous-plate groups, respectively (P = 0.118). At 12 months after surgery, the mean intraocular pressure was 13.6 ± 4.7 mmHg in the silicone-plate group and 17.9 ± 10.9 mmHg in the porous-plate group (P = 0.141). The mean number of glaucoma medications at 12 months was 1.64 ± 1.40 mmHg and 1.89 ± 1.54 mmHg in the silicone- and porous-plate groups, respectively (P = 0.605). Hypertensive phase was not significantly different in the two groups (50.0% of the silicone-plate and 57.7% of the porous-plate groups, P = 0.578). At 12 months after surgery, the percent success for the silicone-plate and porous-plate groups was 88.5% and 53.8%, respectively (P = 0.005). Complications were similar in the two groups.
Conclusion: The porous-plate Ahmed Glaucoma Valve showed similar average intraocular pressure reduction compared with the silicone-plate model. At 12 months after surgery, there was a significantly lower success rate in the porous-plate compared with the silicone-plate group.

Keywords: Ahmed Glaucoma Valve, model FP7, model M4, glaucoma drainage implant, porous polyethylene, Medpor

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]