Cargando…
Which Patients Would Most Likely to Benefit: MIGS or MEGS, Which One Is It?
The availability of ab interno minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) has promoted an international interest in this procedure. Our purpose is to define the role of MIGS in the constant evolving glaucoma treatment algorithm. Current MIGS approaches to lowering intraocular pressure (IOP) include...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Department of Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6903319/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31789645 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/APO.0000000000000260 |
_version_ | 1783477829919309824 |
---|---|
author | Sheheitli, Huda Tirpack, Aubrey R. Parrish, Richard K. |
author_facet | Sheheitli, Huda Tirpack, Aubrey R. Parrish, Richard K. |
author_sort | Sheheitli, Huda |
collection | PubMed |
description | The availability of ab interno minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) has promoted an international interest in this procedure. Our purpose is to define the role of MIGS in the constant evolving glaucoma treatment algorithm. Current MIGS approaches to lowering intraocular pressure (IOP) include increasing trabecular outflow (iStent trabecular microbypass stent, iStent inject, Hydrus Microstent, Kahook Dual Blade goniotomy, Trabectome ab interno trabeculectomy, Excimer laser trabeculotomy, and goniotomy-assisted transluminal trabeculotomy), increasing uveoscleral outflow with suprachoroidal shunts (Cypass microstent), and developing subconjunctival filtration (XEN gel stent and InnFocus microshunt). The efficacy of each depends on the achievement of desired target IOP reduction in a specific patient. The determination of whether a procedure is either a MIGS or minimally effective glaucoma surgery (MEGS) procedure is based on their efficacy and complications. Aqueous humor angiography suggests that success of trabecular bypass MIGS may not be patient-dependent only, but it may be affected by the location and flow of aqueous through collector channels. The future use of aqueous angiography may permit customized treatment of trabecular meshwork dependent MIGS procedures. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6903319 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Department of Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69033192020-01-22 Which Patients Would Most Likely to Benefit: MIGS or MEGS, Which One Is It? Sheheitli, Huda Tirpack, Aubrey R. Parrish, Richard K. Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila) Perspectives The availability of ab interno minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) has promoted an international interest in this procedure. Our purpose is to define the role of MIGS in the constant evolving glaucoma treatment algorithm. Current MIGS approaches to lowering intraocular pressure (IOP) include increasing trabecular outflow (iStent trabecular microbypass stent, iStent inject, Hydrus Microstent, Kahook Dual Blade goniotomy, Trabectome ab interno trabeculectomy, Excimer laser trabeculotomy, and goniotomy-assisted transluminal trabeculotomy), increasing uveoscleral outflow with suprachoroidal shunts (Cypass microstent), and developing subconjunctival filtration (XEN gel stent and InnFocus microshunt). The efficacy of each depends on the achievement of desired target IOP reduction in a specific patient. The determination of whether a procedure is either a MIGS or minimally effective glaucoma surgery (MEGS) procedure is based on their efficacy and complications. Aqueous humor angiography suggests that success of trabecular bypass MIGS may not be patient-dependent only, but it may be affected by the location and flow of aqueous through collector channels. The future use of aqueous angiography may permit customized treatment of trabecular meshwork dependent MIGS procedures. Department of Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong 2019-12-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6903319/ /pubmed/31789645 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/APO.0000000000000260 Text en Copyright © 2019 Asia-Pacific Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Asia-Pacific Academy of Ophthalmology. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 |
spellingShingle | Perspectives Sheheitli, Huda Tirpack, Aubrey R. Parrish, Richard K. Which Patients Would Most Likely to Benefit: MIGS or MEGS, Which One Is It? |
title | Which Patients Would Most Likely to Benefit: MIGS or MEGS, Which One Is It? |
title_full | Which Patients Would Most Likely to Benefit: MIGS or MEGS, Which One Is It? |
title_fullStr | Which Patients Would Most Likely to Benefit: MIGS or MEGS, Which One Is It? |
title_full_unstemmed | Which Patients Would Most Likely to Benefit: MIGS or MEGS, Which One Is It? |
title_short | Which Patients Would Most Likely to Benefit: MIGS or MEGS, Which One Is It? |
title_sort | which patients would most likely to benefit: migs or megs, which one is it? |
topic | Perspectives |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6903319/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31789645 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/APO.0000000000000260 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sheheitlihuda whichpatientswouldmostlikelytobenefitmigsormegswhichoneisit AT tirpackaubreyr whichpatientswouldmostlikelytobenefitmigsormegswhichoneisit AT parrishrichardk whichpatientswouldmostlikelytobenefitmigsormegswhichoneisit |