This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (4)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Is It Worth the Risk?

Eve J. Higginbotham, MD

Arch Ophthalmol. 1997;115(8):1068-1069.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

THE TITLE of this editorial may be questioned by some surgeons given the current widespread use of antimetabolites in filtration surgery. However, consider the evolution of filtration surgery during the last 10 years. Within a short period, the techniques of filtration surgery have changed dramatically, more markedly than during the previous 25 years. During my fellowship in the mid-1980s, full-thickness filtration surgery was touted as the desired procedure for achieving low intraocular pressures in high-risk eyes.¹ By the late 1980s, the Fluorouracil Filtering Surgery Study,² which was supported by the National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md, reassured clinicians that antimetabolites could be safely used in glaucomatous eyes and it was not much longer before we were giving fluorouracil injections to patients undergoing primary filtration surgery. In 1990, Palmer³ introduced North America to mitomycin, a potent antimetabolite that inhibits fibroblastic proliferation in vitro for more . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Baltimore, Md

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?