A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing STREAMLINE Canaloplasty to Trabecular Micro-Bypass Stent Implantation in Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma

被引:0
|
作者
Goldberg, Damien F. [1 ]
Orlich, Claudio [2 ]
Flowers, Brian E. [3 ]
Singh, Inder P. [4 ]
Tyson, Sydney [5 ]
Seibold, Leonard K. [6 ]
ElMallah, Mohammed K. [7 ]
Ison, Elysia M. [8 ]
Harbin, Med [8 ]
Reynolds, Heather [8 ]
Kahook, Malik Y. [9 ]
机构
[1] Wolstan & Goldberg Eye Associates, Torrance, CA USA
[2] Clin 20-20, San Jose, Costa Rica
[3] Ophthalmol Associates, Ft Worth, TX USA
[4] Eye Ctr Racine & Kenosha, Racine, WI USA
[5] Eye Associates & SurgiCenter Vineland, Vineland, NJ USA
[6] Univ Colorado, Eye Ctr, Dept Ophthalmol, Aurora, CO USA
[7] Ocala Eye, Ocala, FL USA
[8] New World Med, Rancho Cucamonga, CA USA
[9] Univ Colorado, Dept Ophthalmol, Anschutz Med Campus, Aurora, CO 80309 USA
来源
CLINICAL OPHTHALMOLOGY | 2024年 / 18卷
关键词
primary open-angle glaucoma; POAG; STREAMLINE; iStent inject W; canaloplasty; microinvasive glaucoma surgery; MIGS; KAHOOK DUAL BLADE; EXCISIONAL GONIOTOMY; INTRAOCULAR-PRESSURE; PHACOEMULSIFICATION; SURGERY;
D O I
10.2147/OPTH.S481945
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Purpose: To report interim results of the VENICE study, a multi-center, randomized, controlled trial (RCT) comparing STREAMLINE Surgical System (STREAMLINE) canaloplasty with iStent inject W (iStent W) implantation in patients with mild- to-moderate primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) undergoing phacoemulsification. Patients and Methods: Safety and efficacy analyses involving the first 72 randomized eyes are included in this report. Following pre- (Screening) and post-medication washout (Eligibility) visits, one eye per subject was randomized 1:1 to STREAMLINE or iStent W after undergoing uncomplicated phacoemulsification. Subjects were evaluated postoperatively at Day 1, Week 1, Month 1, 3, and 6. Intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements, number of IOP-lowering medications, and adverse events (AEs) were assessed at each follow-up visit. Results: Seventy-two eyes were randomized; 35 underwent STREAMLINE canaloplasty and 37 were implanted with the iStent W. Seventy eyes completed their 6-month follow-up. Both the mean morning post-washout Baseline IOP between STREAMLINE 24.86 +/- 3.05 mmHg and iStent W 25.16 +/- 3.41 mmHg and the mean IOP at 6 months between STREAMLINE eyes 16.52 +/- 3.63 mmHg and iStent W eyes 16.08 +/- 3.19 mmHg were not statistically significantly different (p=0.691 and 0.596, respectively). At 6 months, more eyes were on zero glaucoma medications in the STREAMLINE group (81.8%) compared to the iStent W group (78.4%). In medication-free eyes, the mean IOP was reduced from 24.80 +/- 2.79 mmHg to 16.00 +/- 3.40 mmHg and 24.60 +/- 3.18 mmHg to 15.80 +/- 2.21 mmHg in the STREAMLINE and iStent W groups, respectively (p=0.752). Both groups showed reduction in IOP-lowering medications at every visit, compared to pre-washout (Screening), with STREAMLINE resulting in numerically fewer medications 0.20 +/- 0.48 compared to iStent W 0.40 +/- 0.79 at 6 months (P=0.384). AEs were mild and self-limited. Conclusion: To our knowledge, the VENICE trial is the first RCT involving canaloplasty. These interim findings demonstrated comparable IOP and medication reduction between STREAMLINE canaloplasty and iStent W implantation, when combined with phacoemulsification.
引用
收藏
页码:2917 / 2928
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Real-world assessment of second-generation trabecular micro-bypass stents in open-angle glaucoma patients
    Vohra, Vishal
    Madgula, Indira
    Chawla, Harshika
    ADVANCES IN OPHTHALMOLOGY PRACTICE AND RESEARCH, 2025, 5 (01): : 16 - 21
  • [32] BUDGET IMPACT ANALYSIS TO TAKE DECISIONS ABOUT TIME OF INVESTMENT RECOVERY IN IMPLANTABLE MEDICAL DEVICES: TRABECULAR MICRO-BYPASS STENT IN OPEN-ANGLE GLAUCOMA
    Ordonez Molina, J. E.
    Ordonez, A.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2018, 21 : S249 - S249
  • [33] Outcomes after combined CrossMark phacoemulsification and trabecular microbypass stent implantation in controlled open-angle glaucoma
    Seibold, Leonard K.
    Gamett, Kevin M.
    Kennedy, Jeffrey B.
    Mulvahill, Matthew J.
    Kroehl, Miranda E.
    SooHoo, Jeffrey R.
    Pantcheva, Mina B.
    Kahook, Malik Y.
    JOURNAL OF CATARACT AND REFRACTIVE SURGERY, 2016, 42 (09): : 1332 - 1338
  • [34] Phacoemulsification vs phacoemulsification with micro-bypass stent implantation in primary angle closure and primary angle closure glaucoma: A randomized single-masked clinical study
    Chen, David Z.
    Sng, Chelvin C. A.
    Sangtam, Tiakumzuk
    Thomas, Anoop
    Shen, Liang
    Huang, Philemon K.
    Cheng, Jason
    CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2020, 48 (04): : 450 - 461
  • [35] Initial clinical experience with the trabecular micro-bypass stent in patients with glaucoma
    Detlev Spiegel
    Wolfgang Wetzel
    David S. Haffner
    Richard A. Hill
    Advances in Therapy, 2007, 24 : 161 - 170
  • [36] Initial clinical experience with the trabecular micro-bypass stent in patients with glaucoma
    Spiegel, Detlev
    Wetzel, Wolfgang
    Haffner, David S.
    Hill, Richard A.
    ADVANCES IN THERAPY, 2007, 24 (01) : 161 - 170
  • [37] Third-Generation Trabecular Micro-Bypass Implantation with Phacoemulsification for Glaucoma
    Vest, Zachary
    Alinaghizadeh, Nadia
    Prendergast, Connor
    OPHTHALMOLOGY AND THERAPY, 2025, 14 (03) : 529 - 539
  • [38] EFFECT OF ISTENT INJECT TRABECULAR MICRO-BYPASS ON PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES FOR THOSE WITH OPEN-ANGLE GLAUCOMA AND COEXISTING CATARACTS
    Samuelson, T.
    Singh, I. P.
    Katz, L. J.
    Falvey, H.
    Odom, D.
    McSorley, D.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2019, 22 : S890 - S890
  • [39] Efficacy and Safety of Pairing iStent Inject Trabecular Micro-Bypass and iAccess Precision Blade Goniotomy in Patients with Open-Angle Glaucoma
    Mark J. Gallardo
    Matthew Porter
    Ophthalmology and Therapy, 2023, 12 : 1973 - 1987
  • [40] COST-UTILITY ANALYSIS OF TRABECULAR MICRO-BYPASS STENTS VERSUS LASER TRABECULOPLASTY FOR PATIENTS WITH OPEN-ANGLE GLAUCOMA IN COLOMBIA
    Ordonez, J. E.
    Ordonez, A.
    Osorio, U. M.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2018, 21 : S171 - S171