Efficacy of Selective Laser Trabeculoplasty in Patients on Systemic Immunosuppressive Therapy

• Published in: Journal of glaucoma Vol. 32; no. 9; p. 762
• Main Authors: Kaplan, Tyler M, Hammer, Jon D, Kohli, Darrel, Pacheco, Johann M, Hodge, David O, Khanna, Cheryl L, Sit, Arthur J, Roddy, Gavin W
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.09.2023
• Subjects: Antihypertensive Agents - therapeutic use; Humans; Immunosuppression Therapy; Immunosuppressive Agents - therapeutic use; Infant; Intraocular Pressure; Laser Therapy; Lasers, Solid-State - therapeutic use; Ocular Hypotension - drug therapy; Trabeculectomy; Treatment Outcome
• ISSN: 1536-481X
• DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000002259

When comparing patients on systemic immunosuppressive therapy to those without, there was no difference in intraocular pressure (IOP) early after SLT; however, at 1 year following SLT, IOP was higher in the immunosuppression group compared with controls. To determine whether patients taking systemic immunosuppressive medications have a different IOP-lowering response to selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) compared with a control group of patients. All patients who underwent SLT at Mayo Clinic 2017-2021 were identified. Patients on systemic immunosuppressive medications at the time of SLT were compared with control patients not receiving systemic immunosuppressive medications. The primary endpoints of this study were the percentage IOP reduction at 1 to 2, 3 to 6, and 12 months. Additional analyses included the percentage of patients who did not require additional therapy at each time point. There were 108 eyes of 72 patients that underwent SLT in the immunosuppressed group and 1997 eyes of 1417 patients in the control group. There was no significant difference in age-adjusted change in IOP between groups at the first postoperative visit 1 to 2 months following SLT (-18.8±20.7% vs. -16.0±16.5%, P =0.256) or 3-6 months following SLT (-15.2±21.6% vs. -18.3±23.2%, P =0.062). However, at 12 months following SLT, the IOP reduction in the immunosuppressive therapy group was significantly less compared with the control group (-15.1±21.2% vs. -20.3±22.9%, P =0.045). There was no difference between groups in the number of additional treatments during the study intervals. Patients in the systemic immunosuppressive therapy group showed equivalent early IOP-lowering after SLT compared with a control group, but the treatment response was diminished at 1 year. Further studies investigating IOP regulation after SLT in immunosuppressed patients are needed.