Ahmed Glaucoma Valve Implantation to Reduce Intraocular Pressure: Updated Perspectives

References

• Tham Y-C, Li X, Wong TY, Quigley HA, Aung T, Cheng CY. Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology. 2014;121(11):2081–2090. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.05.013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leske MC, Heijl A, Hussein M, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Komaroff E. Factors for glaucoma progression and the effect of treatment: the early manifest glaucoma trial. Arch Ophthalmol. 2003;121(1):48–56. doi:10.1001/archopht.121.1.48
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Molteno AC. New implant for drainage in glaucoma. Clinical trial. Br J Ophthalmol. 1969;53(9):606–615. doi:10.1136/bjo.53.9.606
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patel S, Pasquale LR. Glaucoma drainage devices: a review of the past, present, and future. Semin Ophthalmol. 2010;25(5–6):265–270. doi:10.3109/08820538.2010.518840
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vinod K, Gedde SJ, Feuer WJ, et al. Practice preferences for glaucoma surgery: a survey of the American Glaucoma Society. J Glaucoma. 2017;26(8):687–693. doi:10.1097/IJG.0000000000000720
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy C, Ogston S, Cobb C, MacEwen C. Recent trends in glaucoma surgery in Scotland, England and Wales. Br J Ophthalmol. 2015;99(3):308–312. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2013-304465
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bron AM, Mariet AS, Benzenine E, et al. Trends in operating room-based glaucoma procedures in France from 2005 to 2014: a nationwide study. Br J Ophthalmol. 2017;101(11):1500–1504. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2016-309946
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arora KS, Robin AL, Corcoran KJ, Corcoran SL, Ramulu PY. Use of various glaucoma surgeries and procedures in medicare beneficiaries from 1994 to 2012. Ophthalmology. 2015;122(8):1615–1624. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.04.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gedde SJ, Schiffman JC, Feuer WJ, et al. Treatment outcomes in the Tube Versus Trabeculectomy (TVT) study after five years of follow-up. Am J Ophthalmol. 2012;153:789–803. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2011.10.026
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gedde SJ, Feuer WJ, Shi W, et al. Treatment outcomes in the Primary Tube Versus Trabeculectomy Study after 1 year of follow-up. Ophthalmology. 2018;125:650–663. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.02.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gedde SJ, Feuer WJ, Lim KS, et al. Treatment outcomes in the Primary Tube Versus Trabeculectomy Study after 3 years of follow-up. Ophthalmology. 2020;127:333–345. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2019.10.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gedde SJ, Feuer WJ, Lim KS, et al. Treatment outcomes in the Primary Tube Versus Trabeculectomy Study after 5 years of follow-up. Ophthalmology. 2022;129:1344–1356. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2022.07.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coleman AL, Hill R, Wilson MR, et al. Initial clinical experience with the Ahmed glaucoma valve implant. Am J Ophthalmol. 1995;120:23–31. doi:10.1016/S0002-9394(14)73755-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Topouzis F, Coleman AL, Choplin N, et al. Follow-up of the original cohort with the Ahmed glaucoma valve implant. Am J Ophthalmol. 1999;128(2):198–204. doi:10.1016/S0002-9394(99)00080-X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Budenz DL, Barton K, Feuer WJ, et al. Treatment outcomes in the Ahmed Baerveldt Comparison Study after 1 year of follow-up. Ophthalmology. 2011;118:443–452. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.07.016
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barton K, Feuer WJ, Budenz DL, et al. Three-year treatment outcomes in the Ahmed Baerveldt Comparison study. Ophthalmology. 2014;121:1547–1557. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.01.036
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Budenz DL, Barton K, Gedde SJ, et al. Five-year treatment outcomes in the Ahmed Baerveldt comparison study. Ophthalmology. 2015;122(2):308–316. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.08.043
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christakis PG, Kalenak JW, Zurakowski D, et al. The Ahmed versus Baerveldt study. One-year treatment outcomes. Ophthalmology. 2011;118:2180–2189. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.05.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christakis PG, Tsai JC, Kalenak JW, et al. The Ahmed versus Baerveldt study. Three-year treatment outcomes. Ophthalmology. 2013;120:2232–2240. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.04.018
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christakis PG, Kalenak JW, Tsai JC, et al. The Ahmed versus Baerveldt study: five-year treatment outcomes. Ophthalmology. 2016;123(10):2093–2102. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2016.06.035
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christakis PG, Zhang D, Budenz DL, et al. Five-year pooled data analysis of the Ahmed Baerveldt comparison study and the Ahmed versus Baerveldt study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2017;176:118–126. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2017.01.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yildirim N, Yalvac IS, Sahin A, Ozer A, Bozca T. A comparative study between diode laser cyclophotocoagulation and the Ahmed glaucoma valve implant in neovascular glaucoma: a long-term follow-up. J Glaucoma. 2009;18(3):192–196. doi:10.1097/IJG.0b013e31817d235c
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choy BNK, Lai JSM, Yeung JCC, Chan JCH. Randomized comparative trial of diode laser cyclophotocoagulation versus Ahmed glaucoma valve for neovascular glaucoma in Chinese - a pilot study. Clin Ophthalmol. 2018;12:2542–2552. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S188999
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ishida K, Netland PA, Costa VP, Shiroma L, Khan B, Ahmed II. Comparison of polypropylene and silicone Ahmed Glaucoma Valves. Ophthalmology. 2006;113(8):1320–1326. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.04.020
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hinkle DM, Zurakowski D, Ayyala RS. A comparison of the polypropylene plate Ahmed glaucoma valve to the silicone plate Ahmed glaucoma flexible valve. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2007;17(5):696–701. doi:10.1177/112067210701700502
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alvarado JA, Hollander DA, Juster RP, Lee LC. Ahmed valve implantation with adjunctive mitomycin C and 5-fluorouracil: long-term outcomes. Am J Ophthalmol. 2008;146(2):276–284. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2008.04.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahdy RAR. Adjunctive use of bevacizumab versus mitomycin C with Ahmed valve implantation in treatment of pediatric glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2011;20(7):458–463. doi:10.1097/IJG.0b013e3181efbea5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yazdani S, Mahboobipour H, Pakravan M, Doozandeh A, Ghahari E. Adjunctive Mitomycin C or amniotic membrane transplantation for Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation: a randomized clinical trial. J Glaucoma. 2016;25(5):415–421. doi:10.1097/IJG.0000000000000256
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costa VP, Azuara-Blanco A, Netland PA, Lesk MR, Arcieri ES. Efficacy and safety of adjunctive mitomycin C during Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Ophthalmology. 2004;111(6):1071–1076. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2003.09.037
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Mobarak F, Khan AO. Two-year survival of Ahmed valve implantation in the first 2 years of life with and without intraoperative mitomycin-C. Ophthalmology. 2009;116(10):1862–1865. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.03.030
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozalp O, Ilguy S, Atalay E, Simsek T, Yildirim N. Risk factors for hypertensive phase after Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation. Int Ophthalmol. 2022;42(1):147–156. doi:10.1007/s10792-021-02009-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arikan G, Akbulut B, Utine CA, et al. Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation with the tube placement in the ciliary sulcus: short term results. Int Ophthalmol. 2022;42(3):969–980. doi:10.1007/s10792-021-02080-w
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim NE, Kim SS, Lee JS, et al. Effect of intraoperative mitomycin C on the surgical outcomes of Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation with ciliary sulcus tube placement. Korean J Ophthalmol. 2023;37(3):216–223. doi:10.3341/kjo.2022.0146
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eslami Y, Mohammadi M, Fakhraie G, Zarei R, Moghimi S. Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation with tube insertion through the ciliary sulcus in pseudophakic/aphakic eyes. J Glaucoma. 2014;23(2):115–118. doi:10.1097/IJG.0b013e318265bc0b
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bayer A, Onol M. Clinical outcomes of Ahmed glaucoma valve in anterior chamber versus ciliary sulcus. Eye. 2017;31(4):608–614. doi:10.1038/eye.2016.273
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Souza C, Tran DH, Loman J, Law SK, Coleman AL, Caprioli J. Long-term outcomes of Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation in refractory glaucomas. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007;144(6):893–900. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2007.07.035
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tran DH, Souza C, Ang MJ, et al. Comparison of long-term surgical success of Ahmed valve implant versus trabeculectomy in open-angle glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2009;93(11):1504–1509. doi:10.1136/bjo.2008.150870
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kapelushnik N, Singer R, Barkana Y, et al. Surgical outcomes of Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation without plate sutures: a 10-year retrospective study. J Glaucoma. 2021;30(6):502–507. doi:10.1097/IJG.0000000000001813
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yalvac IS, Eksioglu U, Satana B, Duman S. Long-term results of Ahmed glaucoma valve and Molteno implant in neovascular glaucoma. Eye. 2007;21(1):65–70. doi:10.1038/sj.eye.6702125
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlote T, Ziemssen F, Bartz-Schmidt KU. Pars plana-modified Ahmed glaucoma valve for treatment of refractory glaucoma: a pilot study. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2006;244(3):336–341. doi:10.1007/s00417-005-0008-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maris PJ, Tsai JC, Khatib N, Bansal R, Al-Aswad LA. Clinical outcomes of Ahmed glaucoma valve in posterior segment versus anterior chamber. J Glaucoma. 2013;22(3):183–189. doi:10.1097/IJG.0b013e318237c115
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parihar JKS, Jain VK, Kaushik J, Mishra A. Pars plana-modified versus conventional Ahmed glaucoma valve in patients undergoing penetrating keratoplasty: a prospective comparative randomized study. Curr Eye Res. 2017;42(3):436–442. doi:10.1080/02713683.2016.1185130
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pakravan M, Hatami M, Esfandiari H, et al. Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation: graft-free short tunnel small flap versus scleral patch graft after 1-year follow-up: a randomized clinical trial. Ophthalmol Glaucoma. 2018;1(3):206–212. doi:10.1016/j.ogla.2018.10.008
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Coleman AL, Smyth RJ, Wilson MR, Tam M. Initial clinical experience with the Ahmed Glaucoma Valve implant in pediatric patients. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997;115:186–191. doi:10.1001/archopht.1997.01100150188007
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Coleman AL, Mondino BJ, Wilson MR, Casey R. Clinical experience with the Ahmed glaucoma valve implant in eyes with prior or concurrent penetrating keratoplasties. Am J Ophthalmol. 1997;123:54–61. doi:10.1016/S0002-9394(14)70992-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowden EC, Choudhury A, Gedde SJ, et al. Risk factors for failure of tube shunt surgery: a pooled data analysis. Am J Ophthalmol. 2022;240:217–224. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2022.02.027
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quaranta L, Floriani I, Hollander L, Poli D, Katsanos A, Konstas AGP. Needle revision with 5-fluorouracil for the treatment of Ahmed glaucoma valve filtering blebs: 5-fluorouracil needling revision can be a useful and safe tool in the management of failing Ahmed glaucoma valve filtering blebs. J Glaucoma. 2016;25(4):e367–371. doi:10.1097/IJG.0000000000000366
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eibschitz-Tsimhoni M, Schertzer RM, Musch DC, Moroi SE. Incidence and management of encapsulated cysts following Ahmed glaucoma valve insertion. J Glaucoma. 2005;14(4):276–279. doi:10.1097/01.ijg.0000169391.94555.c1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith M, Buys YM, Trope GE. Second Ahmed valve insertion in the same eye. J Glaucoma. 2009;18(4):336–340. doi:10.1097/IJG.0b013e318182edfb
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee NY, Hwang HB, Oh SH, Park CK. Efficacy of additional glaucoma drainage device insertion in refractory glaucoma: case series with a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Semin Ophthalmol. 2015;30(5–6):345–351. doi:10.3109/08820538.2013.874487
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pitukcheewanont O, Tantisevi V, Chansangpetch S, Rojanapongpun P. Factors related to hypertensive phase after glaucoma drainage device implantation. Clin Ophthalmol. 2018;12:1479–1486. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S166244
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong C, Arosemena A, Zurakowski D, Ayyala RS. Glaucoma drainage devices: a systematic literature review and current controversies. Surv Ophthalmol. 2005;50(1):48–60. doi:10.1016/j.survophthal.2004.10.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith M, Geffen N, Alasbali T, Buys YM, Trope GE. Digital ocular massage for hypertensive phase after Ahmed valve surgery. J Glaucoma. 2010;19:11–14. doi:10.1097/IJG.0b013e31819c485b
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mcllraith I, Buys Y, Campbell RJ, Trope GE. Ocular massage for intraocular pressure control after Ahmed valve insertion. Can J Ophthalmol. 2008;43:48–52. doi:10.3129/i07-188
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kee C. Prevention of early postoperative hypotony by partial ligation of silicone tube in Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation. J Glaucoma. 2001;10(6):466–469. doi:10.1097/00061198-200112000-00005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bikbov MM, Khusnitdinov II. The results of the use of Ahmed valve in refractory glaucoma surgery. J Curr Glaucoma Pract. 2015;9(3):86–91. doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10008-1191
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Koo EB, Hou J, Keenan JD, Stamper RL, Jeng BH, Han Y. Effects of glaucoma tube surgery on corneal endothelial cells: a review. Eye Contact Lens. 2016;42(4):221–224. doi:10.1097/ICL.0000000000000171
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee EK, Yun YJ, Lee JE, et al. Changes in corneal endothelial cells after Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation: 2-year follow-up. Am J Ophthalmol. 2009;148:361–367. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2009.04.016
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arroyave CP, Scott IU, Fantes FE, Feuer WJ, Murray TG. Corneal graft survival and intraocular pressure control after penetrating keratoplasty and glaucoma drainage device implantation. Ophthalmology. 2001;108(11):1978–1985. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(01)00803-X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gedde SJ, Herndon LW, Brandt JD, et al. Postoperative complications in the tube versus trabeculectomy (TVT) study during five years of follow-up. Am J Ophthalmol. 2012;153(5):804–814. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2011.10.024
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mills RP, Reynolds A, Emond MJ, Barlow WE, Leen MM. Long-term survival of Molteno glaucoma drainage devices. Ophthalmology. 1996;103(2):299–305. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(96)30700-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen J, Gedde SJ. New developments in tube shunt surgery. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2019;30(2):125–131. doi:10.1097/ICU.0000000000000549
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaynak S, Tekin NF, Durak I, Berk AT, Saatci AO, Soylev MF. Pars plana vitrectomy with pars plana tube implantation in eyes with intractable glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 1998;82(12):1377–1382. doi:10.1136/bjo.82.12.1377
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang B, Li W. Comparison of pars plana with anterior chamber glaucoma drainage device implantation for glaucoma: a meta-analysis. BMC Ophthalmol. 2018;18(1):212. doi:10.1186/s12886-018-0896-x
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kumar H, Thulasidas M. Pars plana implantation of glaucoma drainage devices- the way to succeed in refractory glaucoma. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2021;69(7):1650–1651. doi:10.4103/ijo.IJO_688_21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rumelt S, Rehany U. Implantation of glaucoma drainage implant tube into the ciliary sulcus in patients with corneal transplants. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998;116(5):685–687. doi:10.1001/archopht.116.5.685
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zhang Q, Liu Y, Thanapaisal S, et al. The effect of tube location on corneal endothelial cells in patients with Ahmed glaucoma valve. Ophthalmology. 2021;128(2):218–226. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.06.050
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim JY, Lee JS, Lee T, et al. Corneal endothelial cell changes and surgical results after Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation: ciliary sulcus versus anterior chamber tube placement. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):12986. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-92420-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samuel S, Chang EK, Gupta S, et al. Outcomes of anterior chamber, sulcus, and pars plana glaucoma drainage device placement in glaucoma patients. J Ophthalmol. 2022;2022:5947992. doi:10.1155/2022/5947992
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bains U, Hoguet A. Aqueous drainage device erosion: a review of rates, risks, prevention, and repair. Semin Ophthalmol. 2018;33(1):1–10. doi:10.1080/08820538.2017.1353805
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart WC, Kristoffersen CJ, Demos CM, Fsadni MG, Stewart JA. Incidence of conjunctival exposure following drainage device implantation in patients with glaucoma. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2010;20(1):124–130. doi:10.1177/112067211002000117
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trubnik V, Zangalli C, Moster MR, et al. Evaluation of risk factors for glaucoma drainage device-related erosions: a retrospective case-control study. J Glaucoma. 2015;24:498–502. doi:10.1097/IJG.0000000000000034
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaku M, Netland PA, Ishida K, Rhee DJ. Risk factors for tube exposure as a late complication of glaucoma drainage implant surgery. Clin Ophthalmol. 2016;10:547–553. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S104029
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozdamar A, Aras C, Ustundag C, Tamcelik N, Ozkan S. Scleral tunnel for the implantation of glaucoma Seton devices. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers. 2001;32(5):432–435. doi:10.3928/1542-8877-20010901-14
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ollila M, Falck A, Airaksinen J. Placing the Molteno implant in a long scleral tunnel to prevent postoperative tube exposure. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2005;83:302–305. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0420.2005.00450.x
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mesa-Gutiérrez JC, Lillo-Sopena J, Monés-Llivina A, Sanz-Moreno S, Arruga-Ginebreda J. Graft-free Ahmed tube insertion: a modified method at 5 mm from limbus. Clin Ophthalmol. 2010;4:359–363. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S9461
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Maki H, Mori S, Imai H, et al. Autologous scleral pocket technique for Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation with pars plana tube insertion for neovascular glaucoma. J Clin Med. 2021;10(8):1606. doi:10.3390/jcm10081606
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lankaranian D, Reis R, Henderer JD, Choe S, Moster MR. Comparison of single thickness and double thickness processed pericardium patch graft in glaucoma drainage device surgery: a single surgeon comparison of outcome. J Glaucoma. 2008;17(1):48–51. doi:10.1097/IJG.0b013e318133fc49
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alvarez-Ascencio D, Lazcano-Gomez G, Flores-Reyes E, Duenas-Angeles K, Jimenez-Roman J, Kahook MY. Tenon cyst patch graft for Ahmed glaucoma valve tube exposure: case series report. J Glaucoma. 2021;30(8):e367–e371. doi:10.1097/IJG.0000000000001776
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Torbak AA, Al-Shahwan S, Al-Jadaan I, Al-Hommadi A, Edward DP. Endophthalmitis associated with the Ahmed glaucoma valve implant. Br J Ophthalmol. 2005;89(4):454–458. doi:10.1136/bjo.2004.049015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheng CX, Moster MR, Khan MA, et al. Infectious endophthalmitis after glaucoma drainage implant surgery. Clinical features, microbial spectrum, and outcomes. Retina. 2017;37(6):1160–1167. doi:10.1097/IAE.0000000000001329
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiang MY, Camuglia JE, Khaw PT. A novel method of extending glaucoma drainage tube: ‘Tube-in-Tube’ technique. J Glaucoma. 2017;26(2):93–95. doi:10.1097/IJG.0000000000000567
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kooner KS. Repair of Molteno implant during surgery. Am J Ophthalmol. 1994;117(5):673. doi:10.1016/S0002-9394(14)70080-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarkisian SR, Netland PA. Tube extender for revision of glaucoma drainage implants. J Glaucoma. 2007;16(7):637–639. doi:10.1097/IJG.0b013e3180640f6c
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sa HS, Kee C. Effect of temporal clear corneal phacoemulsification on intraocular pressure in eyes with prior Ahmed glaucoma valve insertion. J Cataract Ref Surg. 2006;32(6):1011–1014. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2006.02.031
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gujral S, Nouri-Mahdavi K, Caprioli J. Outcomes of small-incision cataract surgery in eyes with preexisting Ahmed glaucoma valves. Am J Ophthalmol. 2005;140(5):911–913. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2005.04.049
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Budenz DL, Feuer WJ, Barton K, et al. Postoperative complications in the Ahmed Baerveldt comparison study during five years of follow-up. Am J Ophthalmol. 2016;163:75–82. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2015.11.023
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robbins L, Goseki T, Law SK, et al. Strabismus after Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation. Am J Ophthalmol. 2021;222:1–5. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2020.08.019
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kilgore KP, Wang F, Stern NC, et al. Rates of diplopia in Ahmed FP7, Baerveldt 250, and 350. Glaucoma patients compared with medical controls. J Glaucoma. 2021;30:579–584. doi:10.1097/IJG.0000000000001886
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ventura MP, Vianna RNG, Filho JPS, Solari HP, Curi RLN. Acquired Brown’s syndrome secondary to Ahmed valve implant for neovascular glaucoma. Eye. 2005;19(2):230–232. doi:10.1038/sj.eye.6701439
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harbick KH, Sidoti PA, Budenz DL, et al. Outcomes of inferonasal Baerveldt glaucoma drainage implant surgery. J Glaucoma. 2006;15(1):7–12. doi:10.1097/01.ijg.0000195597.30600.27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aref AA, Gedde SJ, Budenz DL. Glaucoma drainage implant surgery. Dev Ophthalmol. 2012;50:37–47. doi: 10.1159/000334777
   PubMedGoogle Scholar