Two-year outcomes of minimally invasive XEN Gel Stent implantation in primary open-angle and pseudoexfoliation glaucoma.
Exfoliation Syndrome
/ physiopathology
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Glaucoma Drainage Implants
Glaucoma, Open-Angle
/ physiopathology
Humans
Intraocular Pressure
/ physiology
Male
Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures
/ methods
Prosthesis Design
Retrospective Studies
Stents
Time Factors
Tonometry, Ocular
Treatment Outcome
Ab interno
XEN Gel Stent
glaucoma
minimally invasive glaucoma surgery
Journal
Acta ophthalmologica
ISSN: 1755-3768
Titre abrégé: Acta Ophthalmol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101468102
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2021
Jun 2021
Historique:
received:
20
03
2020
accepted:
28
08
2020
pubmed:
1
10
2020
medline:
25
11
2021
entrez:
30
9
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of XEN In this retrospective, observational, single-centre study, patients with POAG or XFG underwent implantation of the XEN Seventy-nine eyes of 63 patients with open-angle glaucoma were included in the study (71% POAG, 29% XFG). Before surgery, mean IOP was 23.4 ± 7.9 mmHg. IOP was 14.6 ± 3.6 mmHg 12 months postoperatively (-31% from baseline, 95% CI -42% to -20%, n = 30, p < 0.001) and 14.8 ± 4.4 mmHg 24 months postoperatively (-29% from baseline, 95% CI -30% to -41%, n = 28, p < 0.001). Mean number of IOP-lowering medications was significantly reduced from 2.7 ± 1.1 before surgery to 1.0 ± 1.2 (-69%, 95% CI -89% to 46%, p < 0.001) 12 months after surgery and 1.0 ± 1.2 (-64%, 95% CI -91% to -36%, p < 0.001) at 24 months after surgery. Complete surgical success was achieved in 39% (12M) and 34% (24M) of patients and qualified success in 29% (12M) and 27% (24M). 13 (16%) eyes were classified as complete surgical failure. In 62% of the patients needling procedures had to be performed. The XEN
Identifiants
pubmed: 32996702
doi: 10.1111/aos.14627
pmc: PMC8359400
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
369-375Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors. Acta Ophthalmologica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation.
Références
Eye (Lond). 2018 Feb;32(2):324-332
pubmed: 28862254
J Ophthalmic Vis Res. 2015 Jul-Sep;10(3):340-1
pubmed: 26730322
Br J Ophthalmol. 2020 Aug;104(8):1125-1130
pubmed: 31727624
Am J Ophthalmol. 2009 Nov;148(5):670-84
pubmed: 19674729
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015 Sep;41(9):1905-9
pubmed: 26482822
Clin Ophthalmol. 2019 Apr 18;13:685-694
pubmed: 31114145
Am J Ophthalmol. 2017 Feb;174:33-41
pubmed: 27794426
Gene. 2007 Apr 15;391(1-2):1-15
pubmed: 17331678
J Glaucoma. 2018 Feb;27(2):140-147
pubmed: 29271806
Am J Ophthalmol. 2012 May;153(5):789-803.e2
pubmed: 22245458
Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2019 Jul;47(5):581-587
pubmed: 30578661
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2019 Aug;257(8):1741-1750
pubmed: 31093766
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2014 Aug;40(8):1301-6
pubmed: 24943904
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2018 Mar;256(3):621-625
pubmed: 29335776
J Ophthalmol. 2017;2017:5457246
pubmed: 28348884
J Glaucoma. 2019 Aug;28(8):676-684
pubmed: 31162174
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2019 May;257(5):983-996
pubmed: 30758653
Ophthalmology. 2002 Oct;109(10):1902-13
pubmed: 12359612
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2014 Apr;40(4):538-44
pubmed: 24440104
Rambam Maimonides Med J. 2018 Jul 30;9(3):
pubmed: 30089089
Eye (Lond). 2019 Mar;33(3):353-357
pubmed: 30206416
Am J Ophthalmol. 2014 Jan;157(1):26-31
pubmed: 24182743
Am J Ophthalmol. 2017 Nov;183:25-36
pubmed: 28784554
BMC Ophthalmol. 2017 May 12;17(1):66
pubmed: 28499445
Br J Ophthalmol. 2003 Jul;87(7):850-2
pubmed: 12812883
Am J Ophthalmol. 2017 Aug;180:151-157
pubmed: 28624324