[Results of filtering trabeculotomy (FTO) compared to conventional trabeculectomy (TE)-a matched case control study]

European Glaucoma Society - A guide on surgical innovation for glaucoma

PROLOGUE: Glaucoma surgery has been, for many decades now, dominated by the universal gold standard which is trabeculectomy augmented with antimetabolites. Tubes also came into the scene to complement what we use to call conventional or traditional glaucoma surgery. More recently we experienced a changing glaucoma surgery environment with the "advent" of what we have become used to calling Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery (MIGS). What is the unmet need, what is the gap that these newcomers aim to fill? Hippocrates taught us "bring benefit, not harm" and new glaucoma techniques and devices aim to provide safer surgery compared to conventional surgery. For the patient, but also for the clinician, safety is important. Is more safety achieved with new glaucoma surgery and, if so, is it associated with better, equivalent, or worse efficacy? Is new glaucoma surgery intended to replace conventional surgery or to complement it as an 'add-on' to what clinicians already have in their hands to manage glaucoma? Which surgery should be chosen for which patient? What are the options? Are they equivalent? These are too many questions for the clinician! What are the answers to the questions? What is the evidence to support answers? Do we need more evidence and how can we produce high-quality evidence? This EGS Guide explores the changing and challenging glaucoma surgery environment aiming to provide answers to these questions. The EGS uses four words to highlight a continuum: Innovation, Education, Communication, and Implementation. Translating innovation to successful implementation is crucially important and requires high-quality evidence to ensure steps forward to a positive impact on health care when it comes to implementation. The vision of EGS is to provide the best possible well-being and minimal glaucomainduced visual disability in individuals with glaucoma within an affordable healthcare system. In this regard, assessing the changes in glaucoma surgery is a pivotal contribution to better care. As mentioned, this Guide aims to provide answers to the crucial questions above. However, every clinician is aware that answers may differ for every person: an individualised approach is needed. Therefore, there will be no uniform answer for all situations and all patients. Clinicians would need, through the clinical method and possibly some algorithm, to reach answers and decisions at the individual level. In this regard, evidence is needed to support clinicians to make decisions. Of key importance in this Guide is to provide an overview of existing evidence on glaucoma surgery and specifically on recent innovations and novel devices, but also to set standards in surgical design and reporting for future studies on glaucoma surgical innovation. Designing studies in surgery is particularly challenging because of many subtle variations inherent to surgery and hence multiple factors involved in the outcome, but even more because one needs to define carefully outcomes relevant to the research question but also to the future translation into clinical practice. In addition this Guide aims to provide clinical recommendations on novel procedures already in use when insufficient evidence exists. EGS has a long tradition to provide guidance to the ophthalmic community in Europe and worldwide through the EGS Guidelines (now in their 5th Edition). The EGS leadership recognized that the changing environment in glaucoma surgery currently represents a major challenge for the clinician, needing specific guidance. Therefore, the decision was made to issue this Guide on Glaucoma Surgery in order to help clinicians to make appropriate decisions for their patients and also to provide the framework and guidance for researchers to improve the quality of evidence in future studies. Ultimately this Guide will support better Glaucoma Care in accordance with EGS's Vision and Mission. Fotis Topouzis EGS President

Pigment dispersion syndrome and pigmentary glaucoma: overview and racial disparities

Pigment dispersion syndrome (PDS) and pigmentary glaucoma (PG) are two stages within the same ophthalmic disease spectrum, which are known to be affected by race. The prevalence of PDS is underestimated, largely due to its minor clinical symptoms. Although the prevalence of PG is low, the visual impairment associated with PG is extremely severe. The prevalence of PDS-PG is four or more times higher in Caucasians than in Blacks or Asians, and the "classic" PDS in Caucasians has long been used as a benchmark diagnostic criterion. Following extensive research focused on African Americans and Asians, the standard for diagnosing PDS-PG was refined. At the same time, the pathogenesis of PDS is not the same in different races. Hence, the effectiveness of preventive treatment and the need for treatment may not be equivalent in different races. The rate of conversion of PDS to PG is nearly 1/3 in Caucasians and higher in blacks and Asians, requiring more aggressive treatment and monitoring. We systematically searched a PubMed database from inception to March 2022 to provide an overview of research progress in various aspects of PDS-PG. Specifically, this paper considers the effects of race on disease prevalence, clinical manifestation, diagnostic criteria, disease mechanism, hereditary traits, treatment, and prevention to provide an accurate and comprehensive guide for the diagnosis and treatment of PDS-PG in various races.