Comparison of surgical outcomes between initial trabeculectomy and Ex-PRESS in terms of achieving an intraocular pressure below 15 and 18 mmHg: a retrospective comparative study

Comparative Analysis of Surgical Durations and Fees Across Eight Types of Glaucoma Surgery Performed by a Single Surgeon

The duration of several types of glaucoma surgery and reimbursement amounts per minute of surgery remain unknown. This study compared the surgical duration of glaucoma procedures (ab interno trabeculotomy, PreserFlo, ab externo trabeculotomy, bleb revision, EXPRESS, trabeculectomy, Ahmed, and the Baerveldt implant) and their reimbursement amounts in Japan. We retrospectively analyzed 30 consecutive surgeries of each type of glaucoma surgery. The reimbursement amount per surgical hour was calculated by subtracting the implant cost from the total medical fees. Amounts were converted to dollars based on an exchange rate of 1 USD = 133 JPY. The average surgical time was as follows: ab interno trabeculotomy, 7.8 ± 2.1; PreserFlo, 13.5 ± 4.0; ab externo trabeculotomy, 15.2 ± 4.1; bleb revision, 15.6 ± 2.3; EXPRESS, 16.9 ± 2.7; trabeculectomy, 18.5 ± 3.1; Ahmed, 35.8 ± 8.2; and Baerveldt, 39.2 ± 6.2. The reimbursement amounts after implant deduction were as follows: ab interno trabeculotomy, $1,089; PreserFlo, $1,538; ab externo trabeculotomy, $1,430; bleb revision, $259; EXPRESS, $1,600; trabeculectomy, $1,774; Ahmed, $1,600; and Baerveldt, $1,765. Reimbursement amounts per minute varied, with the highest and lowest for ab interno trabeculotomy and bleb revision at $140 per minute and $17 per minute, respectively. Reimbursement amounts per minute of surgery for eight types of glaucoma surgery vary by up to eightfold.

[Why trabeculectomy is better than its reputation]

BACKGROUND

Trabeculectomy (TE) remains one of the most frequently performed glaucoma procedures. This surgery enables sufficient reduction of intraocular pressure (IOP) and freedom from using eye drops; however, complication management and time-consuming postoperative care make many ophthalmic surgeons reluctant to include TE in their treatment regimen.

AIM

This review presents the value of TE compared to other forms of filtering and nonfiltering glaucoma surgery.

CONCLUSION

The use of TE is still the most effective method for lowering IOP and in comparison to other forms of glaucoma surgery in most cases enables freedom from eye drops with a subsequent high quality of life. Postoperative complications occur more frequently, but usually heal spontaneously or can be treated adequately and safely by surgery; however, TE requires intensive postoperative care, which should not be neglected. Repeated surgery due to insufficient IOP reduction is less frequent compared to other forms of glaucoma surgery.