Cargando…

Technique of Xen Implant Revision Surgery and the Surgical Outcomes: A Retrospective Interventional Case Series

PURPOSE: The Xen® Gel Stent (Allergan, Irvine, CA, USA) is a minimally invasive glaucoma surgery device implanted to reduce intra-ocular pressure (IOP) in glaucoma. The stents can fail to drain post-operatively due to scarring of the conjunctiva around the stent opening. Data on the success rates of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Linton, Emma, Au, Leon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Healthcare 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7054468/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32062789
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40123-020-00234-0
_version_ 1783503204884938752
author Linton, Emma
Au, Leon
author_facet Linton, Emma
Au, Leon
author_sort Linton, Emma
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The Xen® Gel Stent (Allergan, Irvine, CA, USA) is a minimally invasive glaucoma surgery device implanted to reduce intra-ocular pressure (IOP) in glaucoma. The stents can fail to drain post-operatively due to scarring of the conjunctiva around the stent opening. Data on the success rates of revision surgery in patients with Xen stent failure are scarce. We present the first detailed report of the steps, outcomes and complications of Xen revision surgery with 12 months of follow-up data. METHODS: We share our experiences on the circumstances in which to perform Xen revision surgery, the steps of the surgery and the results of a retrospective interventional case series of all Xen revisions performed at a single centre from 2013 to 2018. RESULTS: A total of 151 Xen implants were inserted into eyes at our tertiary centre during the study period, of which 21 eyes (patients) underwent revision surgery. Mean pre-operative IOP was 26.1 (standard deviation 8.3) mmHg with the patient on two drops of anti-glaucoma medication. Four patients were excluded from the analysis due to incomplete data (medical records were unavailable for 2 patients; 1 patient died shortly after surgery; and 1 patient moved to another area). A non-functioning Xen implant was identified in another patient during revision surgery, and the procedure was converted to a trabeculectomy. The remaining 16 patients were included in the analysis, all of whom had a minimum follow-up of 12 months, with the longest follow-up being 4 years following revision surgery. Of these 16 patients, four required needling and 5-fluorouracil injection in the first 12 months following revision surgery, three required further glaucoma drainage surgery due to the failure of the revision surgery to control IOP in the first year and one suffered bleb-related endophthalmitis at the site of previous trabeculectomy surgery. Mean IOP at 12 months following revision surgery was 16.3 (standard deviation 3.7) mmHg on 0.7 drops of anti-glaucoma medication, which equates to a 37.5% reduction in IOP and a 65% reduction in the amount of IOP-lowering drops required. CONCLUSION: Our study shares experience on when to perform Xen revision surgery and the steps required. The results of our small cohort are the first in the literature and show that revisions can achieve promising IOP and medication reductions. Some patients still require needling in the post-operative period to optimise outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7054468
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70544682020-03-16 Technique of Xen Implant Revision Surgery and the Surgical Outcomes: A Retrospective Interventional Case Series Linton, Emma Au, Leon Ophthalmol Ther Original Research PURPOSE: The Xen® Gel Stent (Allergan, Irvine, CA, USA) is a minimally invasive glaucoma surgery device implanted to reduce intra-ocular pressure (IOP) in glaucoma. The stents can fail to drain post-operatively due to scarring of the conjunctiva around the stent opening. Data on the success rates of revision surgery in patients with Xen stent failure are scarce. We present the first detailed report of the steps, outcomes and complications of Xen revision surgery with 12 months of follow-up data. METHODS: We share our experiences on the circumstances in which to perform Xen revision surgery, the steps of the surgery and the results of a retrospective interventional case series of all Xen revisions performed at a single centre from 2013 to 2018. RESULTS: A total of 151 Xen implants were inserted into eyes at our tertiary centre during the study period, of which 21 eyes (patients) underwent revision surgery. Mean pre-operative IOP was 26.1 (standard deviation 8.3) mmHg with the patient on two drops of anti-glaucoma medication. Four patients were excluded from the analysis due to incomplete data (medical records were unavailable for 2 patients; 1 patient died shortly after surgery; and 1 patient moved to another area). A non-functioning Xen implant was identified in another patient during revision surgery, and the procedure was converted to a trabeculectomy. The remaining 16 patients were included in the analysis, all of whom had a minimum follow-up of 12 months, with the longest follow-up being 4 years following revision surgery. Of these 16 patients, four required needling and 5-fluorouracil injection in the first 12 months following revision surgery, three required further glaucoma drainage surgery due to the failure of the revision surgery to control IOP in the first year and one suffered bleb-related endophthalmitis at the site of previous trabeculectomy surgery. Mean IOP at 12 months following revision surgery was 16.3 (standard deviation 3.7) mmHg on 0.7 drops of anti-glaucoma medication, which equates to a 37.5% reduction in IOP and a 65% reduction in the amount of IOP-lowering drops required. CONCLUSION: Our study shares experience on when to perform Xen revision surgery and the steps required. The results of our small cohort are the first in the literature and show that revisions can achieve promising IOP and medication reductions. Some patients still require needling in the post-operative period to optimise outcomes. Springer Healthcare 2020-02-15 2020-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7054468/ /pubmed/32062789 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40123-020-00234-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2020, corrected publication 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Research
Linton, Emma
Au, Leon
Technique of Xen Implant Revision Surgery and the Surgical Outcomes: A Retrospective Interventional Case Series
title Technique of Xen Implant Revision Surgery and the Surgical Outcomes: A Retrospective Interventional Case Series
title_full Technique of Xen Implant Revision Surgery and the Surgical Outcomes: A Retrospective Interventional Case Series
title_fullStr Technique of Xen Implant Revision Surgery and the Surgical Outcomes: A Retrospective Interventional Case Series
title_full_unstemmed Technique of Xen Implant Revision Surgery and the Surgical Outcomes: A Retrospective Interventional Case Series
title_short Technique of Xen Implant Revision Surgery and the Surgical Outcomes: A Retrospective Interventional Case Series
title_sort technique of xen implant revision surgery and the surgical outcomes: a retrospective interventional case series
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7054468/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32062789
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40123-020-00234-0
work_keys_str_mv AT lintonemma techniqueofxenimplantrevisionsurgeryandthesurgicaloutcomesaretrospectiveinterventionalcaseseries
AT auleon techniqueofxenimplantrevisionsurgeryandthesurgicaloutcomesaretrospectiveinterventionalcaseseries