ESCRS - POSUS003 - Development And Preliminary Validation Of A Hybrid Three-Dimension Printed Model For Glaucoma Drainage Device Surgery Training: A Prospective Simulation-Based Study

Development And Preliminary Validation Of A Hybrid Three-Dimension Printed Model For Glaucoma Drainage Device Surgery Training: A Prospective Simulation-Based Study

Published 2026 - 44th Congress of the ESCRS

Reference: POSUS003 | Type: Free paper | DOI: 10.82333/ta6g-sk05

Authors: Dr Abdulrahman MORAD Alkaff* 1 , Dr Adi Al Owaifeer 2 , Dr Anas Alqurashi 3 , Dr Sami AlShahwan 1 , Dr Ahmed Al-Yahya 4 , Dr Khalid Alalmaee 5 , Dr Ahmed Allubly 6

1Glaucoma,King Khaled Eye Specialist Hospital and Research Center,Riyadh,Saudi Arabia, 2Glaucoma,King Khaled Eye Specialist Hospital and Research Center,Riyadh,Saudi Arabia;Department of Surgery,King Faisal University,Al-Ahsa,Saudi Arabia, 3College of Medicine,Umm Alqura University,Makah,Saudi Arabia, 4Executive Medical Department,King Khaled Eye Specialist Hospital and Research Center,Riyadh,Saudi Arabia, 5Rehabilitation Department,Prince Sultan Military Medical City,Riyadh,Saudi Arabia, 6Anesthesia Department,King Fahad Medical City, Riyadh,Riyadh,Saudi Arabia

Purpose

To develop a 3D-printed training model for glaucoma drainage device (GDD) surgery and assess its realism and procedural performance compared to a commercial Baerveldt glaucoma implant (BGI).

Setting

Single tertiary eye care center’s specialized surgical training wet lab.

Methods

Prospective simulation-based study. Fourteen glaucoma specialists (8 fellows, 6 consultants) performed simulated GDD surgeries on ovine eyes—first using the 3D-printed model, then the BGI. Procedure times were stopwatch-measured; technical/visual realism and utility rated on 5-point Likert scale (1=not similar/useful to 5=extremely similar/useful). Non-randomized; no blinding due to visible device differences.

Results

3D model procedures took longer overall (median [IQR] 530.5 [302.5] vs 342 [132.5] s; p<0.001), specifically plate insertion (p=0.039), tube insertion (p=0.001), tube fixation (p=0.025); plate fixation non-significant (p=0.078). Highest realism scores: plate/tube fixation (4.00, 4.00 ); overall utility 4.00. Consultants faster than fellows on BGI plate insertion only (112.5  vs 180  s; p=0.023).

Conclusions

The 3D-printed model showed acceptable realism and high utility despite longer times, positioning it as a viable low-cost training tool for GDD surgery.