Cargando…

Preliminary results of Preserflo Microshunt versus Preserflo Microshunt and Ologen implantation

PURPOSE: To report preliminary 6-month results on the use of the Preserflo Microshunt implant with and without Ologen in 50 pseudophakic eyes with moderate to advanced primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG). METHODS: Fifty pseudophakic eyes underwent ab externo Preserflo Microshunt implantation. Data wa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vastardis, Iraklis, Fili, Sofia, Perdikakis, Georgios, Kontopoulou, Kalliopi, Balidis, Miltos, Gatzioufas, Zisis, Kohlhaas, Markus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8414750/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34479641
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40662-021-00253-3
_version_ 1783747841591607296
author Vastardis, Iraklis
Fili, Sofia
Perdikakis, Georgios
Kontopoulou, Kalliopi
Balidis, Miltos
Gatzioufas, Zisis
Kohlhaas, Markus
author_facet Vastardis, Iraklis
Fili, Sofia
Perdikakis, Georgios
Kontopoulou, Kalliopi
Balidis, Miltos
Gatzioufas, Zisis
Kohlhaas, Markus
author_sort Vastardis, Iraklis
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To report preliminary 6-month results on the use of the Preserflo Microshunt implant with and without Ologen in 50 pseudophakic eyes with moderate to advanced primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG). METHODS: Fifty pseudophakic eyes underwent ab externo Preserflo Microshunt implantation. Data was gathered retrospectively and two groups were then created, group A with application of MMC 0.2 mg/ml and group B with MMC 0.2 mg/ml and Ologen collagen matrix (OCM) implantation. Absolute success was regarded as the percentage of eyes achieving: a) 5 ≤ intraocular pressure (IOP) ≤ 13 mmHg, b) 5 ≤ IOP ≤ 16 mmHg, and c) 5 ≤ IOP ≤ 21 mmHg without additional medication or surgery and qualified success was regarded as the percentage of eyes achieving a) IOP ≤ 13 mmHg, b) IOP ≤ 16 mmHg, and c) IOP ≤ 21 mmHg with or without medication. Evaluation was performed using a log-rank Kaplan-Meier test. A scatterplot analysis presented the treatment effect data of all eyes with a minimum of 20% IOP reduction per case. Failure was defined as requiring additional surgery, IOP greater than 21 mmHg with or without medication and failure to reach 20% IOP reduction. RESULTS: Mean postoperative IOP was significantly lower in both groups. IOP decreased by 49.06% in group A and by 53.01% in group B at 6 months (P < 0.88), respectively. Medication use was lower in both groups (Wilcoxon test, P < 0.001). The absolute and qualified success rates were not statistically significant between the groups (all P > 0.05). Cumulative IOP results per case were not statistically different in group A compared with group B. One revision surgery in group A (4% failure rate) and three in group B (12% failure rate) were performed. CONCLUSIONS: Both groups showed equal results in terms of cumulative and mean IOP reduction, medication reduction as well as in absolute and qualified success rates. No significant difference was found in any parameters tested between Preserflo Microshunt with MMC 0.2 mg/ml and with or without OCM implantation at 6 months. Long-term follow-up is required to further evaluate this data.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8414750
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84147502021-09-09 Preliminary results of Preserflo Microshunt versus Preserflo Microshunt and Ologen implantation Vastardis, Iraklis Fili, Sofia Perdikakis, Georgios Kontopoulou, Kalliopi Balidis, Miltos Gatzioufas, Zisis Kohlhaas, Markus Eye Vis (Lond) Research PURPOSE: To report preliminary 6-month results on the use of the Preserflo Microshunt implant with and without Ologen in 50 pseudophakic eyes with moderate to advanced primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG). METHODS: Fifty pseudophakic eyes underwent ab externo Preserflo Microshunt implantation. Data was gathered retrospectively and two groups were then created, group A with application of MMC 0.2 mg/ml and group B with MMC 0.2 mg/ml and Ologen collagen matrix (OCM) implantation. Absolute success was regarded as the percentage of eyes achieving: a) 5 ≤ intraocular pressure (IOP) ≤ 13 mmHg, b) 5 ≤ IOP ≤ 16 mmHg, and c) 5 ≤ IOP ≤ 21 mmHg without additional medication or surgery and qualified success was regarded as the percentage of eyes achieving a) IOP ≤ 13 mmHg, b) IOP ≤ 16 mmHg, and c) IOP ≤ 21 mmHg with or without medication. Evaluation was performed using a log-rank Kaplan-Meier test. A scatterplot analysis presented the treatment effect data of all eyes with a minimum of 20% IOP reduction per case. Failure was defined as requiring additional surgery, IOP greater than 21 mmHg with or without medication and failure to reach 20% IOP reduction. RESULTS: Mean postoperative IOP was significantly lower in both groups. IOP decreased by 49.06% in group A and by 53.01% in group B at 6 months (P < 0.88), respectively. Medication use was lower in both groups (Wilcoxon test, P < 0.001). The absolute and qualified success rates were not statistically significant between the groups (all P > 0.05). Cumulative IOP results per case were not statistically different in group A compared with group B. One revision surgery in group A (4% failure rate) and three in group B (12% failure rate) were performed. CONCLUSIONS: Both groups showed equal results in terms of cumulative and mean IOP reduction, medication reduction as well as in absolute and qualified success rates. No significant difference was found in any parameters tested between Preserflo Microshunt with MMC 0.2 mg/ml and with or without OCM implantation at 6 months. Long-term follow-up is required to further evaluate this data. BioMed Central 2021-09-03 /pmc/articles/PMC8414750/ /pubmed/34479641 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40662-021-00253-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits 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/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Vastardis, Iraklis
Fili, Sofia
Perdikakis, Georgios
Kontopoulou, Kalliopi
Balidis, Miltos
Gatzioufas, Zisis
Kohlhaas, Markus
Preliminary results of Preserflo Microshunt versus Preserflo Microshunt and Ologen implantation
title Preliminary results of Preserflo Microshunt versus Preserflo Microshunt and Ologen implantation
title_full Preliminary results of Preserflo Microshunt versus Preserflo Microshunt and Ologen implantation
title_fullStr Preliminary results of Preserflo Microshunt versus Preserflo Microshunt and Ologen implantation
title_full_unstemmed Preliminary results of Preserflo Microshunt versus Preserflo Microshunt and Ologen implantation
title_short Preliminary results of Preserflo Microshunt versus Preserflo Microshunt and Ologen implantation
title_sort preliminary results of preserflo microshunt versus preserflo microshunt and ologen implantation
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8414750/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34479641
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40662-021-00253-3
work_keys_str_mv AT vastardisiraklis preliminaryresultsofpreserflomicroshuntversuspreserflomicroshuntandologenimplantation
AT filisofia preliminaryresultsofpreserflomicroshuntversuspreserflomicroshuntandologenimplantation
AT perdikakisgeorgios preliminaryresultsofpreserflomicroshuntversuspreserflomicroshuntandologenimplantation
AT kontopouloukalliopi preliminaryresultsofpreserflomicroshuntversuspreserflomicroshuntandologenimplantation
AT balidismiltos preliminaryresultsofpreserflomicroshuntversuspreserflomicroshuntandologenimplantation
AT gatzioufaszisis preliminaryresultsofpreserflomicroshuntversuspreserflomicroshuntandologenimplantation
AT kohlhaasmarkus preliminaryresultsofpreserflomicroshuntversuspreserflomicroshuntandologenimplantation