Ophthalmology and Therapy (Oct 2023)

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Two Different Trabecular MIGS Devices With and Without Ab Interno Canaloplasty in Patients with Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma

  • Mitchell Shultz,
  • Abraham Chorbajian,
  • Ala Zohouralen

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40123-023-00819-5
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 12, no. 6
pp. 3307 – 3322

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Introduction This study compared outcomes of the iStent inject trabecular micro-bypass system versus the Hydrus Microstent in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG). Methods Forty subjects (80 eyes) with POAG were included in this single-center, retrospective, contralateral-eye analysis. All patients underwent phacoemulsification with either iStent inject or Hydrus implantation in one eye and the other device in the contralateral eye, with ≥ 3-month follow-up. In 58 eyes (27 iStent inject, 31 Hydrus) the surgery also included ab interno canaloplasty (ABiC). Twelve-month outcomes included intraocular pressure (IOP), medications, and adverse events. Subgroup analyses were completed for iStent inject versus Hydrus, and with versus without ABiC. Results At 12 months versus baseline, mean IOP reduced from 16.8 ± 3.7 to 13.6 ± 2.9 (p = 0.003) in iStent inject eyes, and from 18.1 ± 4.5 to 14.9 ± 3.2 mmHg (p = 0.003) in Hydrus eyes (between-group IOP reduction p = 0.582). Mean number of glaucoma medications reduced from 1.23 ± 0.97 to 0.30 ± 0.76 (p < 0.001) in iStent inject eyes and from 1.20 ± 1.02 to 0.39 ± 0.72 (p = 0.001) in Hydrus eyes (between-group medication reduction p = 0.943). At 12 months, 82.6% of iStent inject eyes and 73.9% of Hydrus eyes were medication-free versus 20.0% preoperatively in both groups (p < 0.0001 both groups). There were no statistically significant IOP or medication differences between iStent inject and Hydrus pre- or postoperatively, both in the overall cohort and in the with/without ABiC subgroups. Outcomes also were similar between eyes with/without ABiC in the overall cohort and in the iStent inject/Hydrus subgroups. There were no adverse events in the iStent inject group; two eyes in the Hydrus group had device-related complications requiring five additional surgeries (one Hydrus repositioning, one Hydrus exchange, one Hydrus removal, two goniotomies). Conclusion In this contralateral-eye comparison of iStent inject versus Hydrus, the groups had similar IOP and medication outcomes, regardless of stratification by ABiC completion. Eyes receiving Hydrus had more complications and subsequent surgeries.

Keywords