XEN® Gel Stent compared to PRESERFLO™ MicroShunt implantation for primary open‐angle glaucoma: two‐year results
Purpose To evaluate the long‐term efficacy and safety of two minimally invasive glaucoma surgery implants with a subconjunctival drainage approach: the XEN45 Gel Stent® (Xen) implant and the PRESERFLO™ MicroShunt (MicroShunt). Methods Retrospective comparative case series of primary open‐angle glauc...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Acta ophthalmologica (Oxford, England) England), 2021-05, Vol.99 (3), p.e433-e440 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | e440 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | e433 |
| container_title | Acta ophthalmologica (Oxford, England) |
| container_volume | 99 |
| creator | Scheres, Lotte M.J. Kujovic‐Aleksov, Stefani Ramdas, Wishal D. Crom, Ronald M.P.C. Roelofs, Lianne C.G. Berendschot, Tos T.J.M. Webers, Carroll A.B. Beckers, Henny J.M. |
| description | Purpose
To evaluate the long‐term efficacy and safety of two minimally invasive glaucoma surgery implants with a subconjunctival drainage approach: the XEN45 Gel Stent® (Xen) implant and the PRESERFLO™ MicroShunt (MicroShunt).
Methods
Retrospective comparative case series of primary open‐angle glaucoma (POAG) patients with at least 6 months of follow‐up after a MicroShunt or Xen implantation augmented with mitomycin C.
Results
Forty‐one eyes of 31 patients underwent Xen implantation, and 41 eyes of 33 patients, MicroShunt implantation. Baseline characteristics were similar, except for more combined surgeries with phacoemulsification in the Xen group (37% vs. 2%). Mean baseline IOP ± standard deviation dropped from 19.2 ± 4.4 to 13.8 ± 3.8 mmHg (n = 26) in the Xen group and from 20.1 ± 5.0 to 12.1 ± 3.5 (n = 14) in the MicroShunt group at 24 months of follow‐up (p = 0.19, t‐test). The number of IOP‐lowering medications dropped from 2.5 ± 1.4 to 0.9 ± 1.2 in the Xen group and from 2.3 ± 1.5 to 0.7 ± 1.1 in the MicroShunt group. The probability of qualified success was 73% and 79% at 24 months of follow‐up for the Xen and MicroShunt groups, respectively. Postoperative complications were usually mild and self‐limiting. The number of bleb needling and secondary glaucoma surgery procedures was similar in both groups; however, in the Xen group more additional MicroPulse® transscleral cyclophotocoagulation procedures were performed.
Conclusion
Xen Gel Stent and PreserFlo MicroShunt implantations achieved comparable results in POAG eyes in terms of IOP‐lowering and surgical success, with a similar high safety profile. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/aos.14602 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8246811</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2441608965</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4432-90e5c192b2a56fbe9d2bedfe9252fea00b49edf32c95395dead826d1f87ae6f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU9O3DAYxa2qiP8LLlBZ6gYWM9hO7Im7qITQMEWaMohhwc5yki9DkBOndgKaHQsOwBk4AIfoUTgJpjOMSqV6Y3_2T0_v-SG0R0mfhnWore_TWBD2CW3SAee9aCCSz6szv9pAW97fECKoEPE62oiYJFIkbBPdXg3Pfj_jERg8baFucWarRjvIcWvx-cVwOrw4GU9eHp7wzzJzdnrdBaasGqPrVrelrXFhHW5cWWk3x7aB-uX-UdczA3hmdBfU9Dfc3tlwOwftsAPfmdbvoLVCGw-7y30bXZ4ML49_9MaT0enx0biXxXHEepIAz6hkKdNcFCnInKWQFyAZZwVoQtJYhjlimeSR5DnoPGEip0Uy0CCKaBt9X8g2XVpBnoWAThu1tKusLtXHl7q8VjN7qxIWi4TSILC_FHD2Vwe-VVXpMzAhPtjOKxbHVJBECh7Qr_-gN7ZzdUinglvKeUQGMlAHCyp8pvcOipUZStRbmSqUqf6UGdgvf7tfke_tBeBwAdyVBub_V1JHk-lC8hUBkq7p</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2521553079</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>XEN® Gel Stent compared to PRESERFLO™ MicroShunt implantation for primary open‐angle glaucoma: two‐year results</title><source>Wiley Free Content</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Scheres, Lotte M.J. ; Kujovic‐Aleksov, Stefani ; Ramdas, Wishal D. ; Crom, Ronald M.P.C. ; Roelofs, Lianne C.G. ; Berendschot, Tos T.J.M. ; Webers, Carroll A.B. ; Beckers, Henny J.M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Scheres, Lotte M.J. ; Kujovic‐Aleksov, Stefani ; Ramdas, Wishal D. ; Crom, Ronald M.P.C. ; Roelofs, Lianne C.G. ; Berendschot, Tos T.J.M. ; Webers, Carroll A.B. ; Beckers, Henny J.M.</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
To evaluate the long‐term efficacy and safety of two minimally invasive glaucoma surgery implants with a subconjunctival drainage approach: the XEN45 Gel Stent® (Xen) implant and the PRESERFLO™ MicroShunt (MicroShunt).
Methods
Retrospective comparative case series of primary open‐angle glaucoma (POAG) patients with at least 6 months of follow‐up after a MicroShunt or Xen implantation augmented with mitomycin C.
Results
Forty‐one eyes of 31 patients underwent Xen implantation, and 41 eyes of 33 patients, MicroShunt implantation. Baseline characteristics were similar, except for more combined surgeries with phacoemulsification in the Xen group (37% vs. 2%). Mean baseline IOP ± standard deviation dropped from 19.2 ± 4.4 to 13.8 ± 3.8 mmHg (n = 26) in the Xen group and from 20.1 ± 5.0 to 12.1 ± 3.5 (n = 14) in the MicroShunt group at 24 months of follow‐up (p = 0.19, t‐test). The number of IOP‐lowering medications dropped from 2.5 ± 1.4 to 0.9 ± 1.2 in the Xen group and from 2.3 ± 1.5 to 0.7 ± 1.1 in the MicroShunt group. The probability of qualified success was 73% and 79% at 24 months of follow‐up for the Xen and MicroShunt groups, respectively. Postoperative complications were usually mild and self‐limiting. The number of bleb needling and secondary glaucoma surgery procedures was similar in both groups; however, in the Xen group more additional MicroPulse® transscleral cyclophotocoagulation procedures were performed.
Conclusion
Xen Gel Stent and PreserFlo MicroShunt implantations achieved comparable results in POAG eyes in terms of IOP‐lowering and surgical success, with a similar high safety profile.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1755-375X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1755-3768</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/aos.14602</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32909682</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Eye ; Glaucoma ; Implants ; minimally invasive glaucoma surgery ; Mitomycin C ; Original ; PRESERFLO MicroShunt ; Surgery ; Surgical outcomes ; Transplants & implants ; Xen gel stent</subject><ispartof>Acta ophthalmologica (Oxford, England), 2021-05, Vol.99 (3), p.e433-e440</ispartof><rights>2020 The Authors. Acta Ophthalmologica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation</rights><rights>2020 The Authors. Acta Ophthalmologica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation.</rights><rights>2020. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4432-90e5c192b2a56fbe9d2bedfe9252fea00b49edf32c95395dead826d1f87ae6f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4432-90e5c192b2a56fbe9d2bedfe9252fea00b49edf32c95395dead826d1f87ae6f3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-0262-0540 ; 0000-0002-8101-939X ; 0000-0002-1780-5281 ; 0000-0001-9406-1426</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Faos.14602$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Faos.14602$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,1411,1427,27901,27902,45550,45551,46384,46808</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32909682$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Scheres, Lotte M.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kujovic‐Aleksov, Stefani</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramdas, Wishal D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Crom, Ronald M.P.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roelofs, Lianne C.G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berendschot, Tos T.J.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Webers, Carroll A.B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beckers, Henny J.M.</creatorcontrib><title>XEN® Gel Stent compared to PRESERFLO™ MicroShunt implantation for primary open‐angle glaucoma: two‐year results</title><title>Acta ophthalmologica (Oxford, England)</title><addtitle>Acta Ophthalmol</addtitle><description>Purpose
To evaluate the long‐term efficacy and safety of two minimally invasive glaucoma surgery implants with a subconjunctival drainage approach: the XEN45 Gel Stent® (Xen) implant and the PRESERFLO™ MicroShunt (MicroShunt).
Methods
Retrospective comparative case series of primary open‐angle glaucoma (POAG) patients with at least 6 months of follow‐up after a MicroShunt or Xen implantation augmented with mitomycin C.
Results
Forty‐one eyes of 31 patients underwent Xen implantation, and 41 eyes of 33 patients, MicroShunt implantation. Baseline characteristics were similar, except for more combined surgeries with phacoemulsification in the Xen group (37% vs. 2%). Mean baseline IOP ± standard deviation dropped from 19.2 ± 4.4 to 13.8 ± 3.8 mmHg (n = 26) in the Xen group and from 20.1 ± 5.0 to 12.1 ± 3.5 (n = 14) in the MicroShunt group at 24 months of follow‐up (p = 0.19, t‐test). The number of IOP‐lowering medications dropped from 2.5 ± 1.4 to 0.9 ± 1.2 in the Xen group and from 2.3 ± 1.5 to 0.7 ± 1.1 in the MicroShunt group. The probability of qualified success was 73% and 79% at 24 months of follow‐up for the Xen and MicroShunt groups, respectively. Postoperative complications were usually mild and self‐limiting. The number of bleb needling and secondary glaucoma surgery procedures was similar in both groups; however, in the Xen group more additional MicroPulse® transscleral cyclophotocoagulation procedures were performed.
Conclusion
Xen Gel Stent and PreserFlo MicroShunt implantations achieved comparable results in POAG eyes in terms of IOP‐lowering and surgical success, with a similar high safety profile.</description><subject>Eye</subject><subject>Glaucoma</subject><subject>Implants</subject><subject>minimally invasive glaucoma surgery</subject><subject>Mitomycin C</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>PRESERFLO MicroShunt</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical outcomes</subject><subject>Transplants & implants</subject><subject>Xen gel stent</subject><issn>1755-375X</issn><issn>1755-3768</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kU9O3DAYxa2qiP8LLlBZ6gYWM9hO7Im7qITQMEWaMohhwc5yki9DkBOndgKaHQsOwBk4AIfoUTgJpjOMSqV6Y3_2T0_v-SG0R0mfhnWore_TWBD2CW3SAee9aCCSz6szv9pAW97fECKoEPE62oiYJFIkbBPdXg3Pfj_jERg8baFucWarRjvIcWvx-cVwOrw4GU9eHp7wzzJzdnrdBaasGqPrVrelrXFhHW5cWWk3x7aB-uX-UdczA3hmdBfU9Dfc3tlwOwftsAPfmdbvoLVCGw-7y30bXZ4ML49_9MaT0enx0biXxXHEepIAz6hkKdNcFCnInKWQFyAZZwVoQtJYhjlimeSR5DnoPGEip0Uy0CCKaBt9X8g2XVpBnoWAThu1tKusLtXHl7q8VjN7qxIWi4TSILC_FHD2Vwe-VVXpMzAhPtjOKxbHVJBECh7Qr_-gN7ZzdUinglvKeUQGMlAHCyp8pvcOipUZStRbmSqUqf6UGdgvf7tfke_tBeBwAdyVBub_V1JHk-lC8hUBkq7p</recordid><startdate>202105</startdate><enddate>202105</enddate><creator>Scheres, Lotte M.J.</creator><creator>Kujovic‐Aleksov, Stefani</creator><creator>Ramdas, Wishal D.</creator><creator>Crom, Ronald M.P.C.</creator><creator>Roelofs, Lianne C.G.</creator><creator>Berendschot, Tos T.J.M.</creator><creator>Webers, Carroll A.B.</creator><creator>Beckers, Henny J.M.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><general>John Wiley and Sons Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0262-0540</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8101-939X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1780-5281</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9406-1426</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202105</creationdate><title>XEN® Gel Stent compared to PRESERFLO™ MicroShunt implantation for primary open‐angle glaucoma: two‐year results</title><author>Scheres, Lotte M.J. ; Kujovic‐Aleksov, Stefani ; Ramdas, Wishal D. ; Crom, Ronald M.P.C. ; Roelofs, Lianne C.G. ; Berendschot, Tos T.J.M. ; Webers, Carroll A.B. ; Beckers, Henny J.M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4432-90e5c192b2a56fbe9d2bedfe9252fea00b49edf32c95395dead826d1f87ae6f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Eye</topic><topic>Glaucoma</topic><topic>Implants</topic><topic>minimally invasive glaucoma surgery</topic><topic>Mitomycin C</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>PRESERFLO MicroShunt</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical outcomes</topic><topic>Transplants & implants</topic><topic>Xen gel stent</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Scheres, Lotte M.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kujovic‐Aleksov, Stefani</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramdas, Wishal D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Crom, Ronald M.P.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roelofs, Lianne C.G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berendschot, Tos T.J.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Webers, Carroll A.B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beckers, Henny J.M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Acta ophthalmologica (Oxford, England)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Scheres, Lotte M.J.</au><au>Kujovic‐Aleksov, Stefani</au><au>Ramdas, Wishal D.</au><au>Crom, Ronald M.P.C.</au><au>Roelofs, Lianne C.G.</au><au>Berendschot, Tos T.J.M.</au><au>Webers, Carroll A.B.</au><au>Beckers, Henny J.M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>XEN® Gel Stent compared to PRESERFLO™ MicroShunt implantation for primary open‐angle glaucoma: two‐year results</atitle><jtitle>Acta ophthalmologica (Oxford, England)</jtitle><addtitle>Acta Ophthalmol</addtitle><date>2021-05</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>99</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>e433</spage><epage>e440</epage><pages>e433-e440</pages><issn>1755-375X</issn><eissn>1755-3768</eissn><abstract>Purpose
To evaluate the long‐term efficacy and safety of two minimally invasive glaucoma surgery implants with a subconjunctival drainage approach: the XEN45 Gel Stent® (Xen) implant and the PRESERFLO™ MicroShunt (MicroShunt).
Methods
Retrospective comparative case series of primary open‐angle glaucoma (POAG) patients with at least 6 months of follow‐up after a MicroShunt or Xen implantation augmented with mitomycin C.
Results
Forty‐one eyes of 31 patients underwent Xen implantation, and 41 eyes of 33 patients, MicroShunt implantation. Baseline characteristics were similar, except for more combined surgeries with phacoemulsification in the Xen group (37% vs. 2%). Mean baseline IOP ± standard deviation dropped from 19.2 ± 4.4 to 13.8 ± 3.8 mmHg (n = 26) in the Xen group and from 20.1 ± 5.0 to 12.1 ± 3.5 (n = 14) in the MicroShunt group at 24 months of follow‐up (p = 0.19, t‐test). The number of IOP‐lowering medications dropped from 2.5 ± 1.4 to 0.9 ± 1.2 in the Xen group and from 2.3 ± 1.5 to 0.7 ± 1.1 in the MicroShunt group. The probability of qualified success was 73% and 79% at 24 months of follow‐up for the Xen and MicroShunt groups, respectively. Postoperative complications were usually mild and self‐limiting. The number of bleb needling and secondary glaucoma surgery procedures was similar in both groups; however, in the Xen group more additional MicroPulse® transscleral cyclophotocoagulation procedures were performed.
Conclusion
Xen Gel Stent and PreserFlo MicroShunt implantations achieved comparable results in POAG eyes in terms of IOP‐lowering and surgical success, with a similar high safety profile.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>32909682</pmid><doi>10.1111/aos.14602</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0262-0540</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8101-939X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1780-5281</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9406-1426</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1755-375X |
| ispartof | Acta ophthalmologica (Oxford, England), 2021-05, Vol.99 (3), p.e433-e440 |
| issn | 1755-375X 1755-3768 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8246811 |
| source | Wiley Free Content; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
| subjects | Eye Glaucoma Implants minimally invasive glaucoma surgery Mitomycin C Original PRESERFLO MicroShunt Surgery Surgical outcomes Transplants & implants Xen gel stent |
| title | XEN® Gel Stent compared to PRESERFLO™ MicroShunt implantation for primary open‐angle glaucoma: two‐year results |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T04%3A51%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=XEN%C2%AE%20Gel%20Stent%20compared%20to%20PRESERFLO%E2%84%A2%20MicroShunt%20implantation%20for%20primary%20open%E2%80%90angle%20glaucoma:%20two%E2%80%90year%20results&rft.jtitle=Acta%20ophthalmologica%20(Oxford,%20England)&rft.au=Scheres,%20Lotte%20M.J.&rft.date=2021-05&rft.volume=99&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=e433&rft.epage=e440&rft.pages=e433-e440&rft.issn=1755-375X&rft.eissn=1755-3768&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/aos.14602&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2441608965%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2521553079&rft_id=info:pmid/32909682&rfr_iscdi=true |