Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Aug 12:13:1533-1542.
doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S215667. eCollection 2019.

Ab interno canaloplasty combined with trabecular bypass stenting in eyes with primary open-angle glaucoma

Affiliations

Ab interno canaloplasty combined with trabecular bypass stenting in eyes with primary open-angle glaucoma

Marius Heersink et al. Clin Ophthalmol. .

Abstract

Purpose: Evaluate outcomes of trabecular meshwork (TM) bypass (iStent® GTS100) with cataract extraction (CE) and TM-bypass + ab interno canaloplasty (CP) (VISCO360®) with CE in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG).

Setting: Private surgical center for a comprehensive ophthalmology practice.

Design: Retrospective analysis of 186 eyes from 130 consecutive patients with 6 months follow-up.

Methods: Eligible eyes had POAG, indicated for CE, and had received CE + TM-bypass or CE + TM-bypass + CP. Exclusions: glaucomas not POAG, SLT within 6 months, or previous ALT. IOP, visual acuity, and medication use assessed at baseline, months 1, 3, and 6. Endpoints were mean reduction in IOP from baseline at 6 months, proportion with IOP reduction at 6 months of ≥20% and IOP <18 mmHg on same or fewer medications, mean medication reduction, and proportion medication independent.

Results: Eighty-six eyes comprised the CE + TM-bypass + CP group; 100 eyes in the CE + TM-bypass group. At 6 months: mean IOP reduction was 2.9±3.6 mmHg for CE + TM-bypass + CP and 1.7±3.1 mmHg for CE + TM-bypass group (P<0.05); the proportion with IOP reduction of ≥20% and an IOP <18 mmHg on the same or fewer medications was 46% for CE + TM-bypass + CP and 35% for CE + TM-bypass; for both CE + TM-bypass + CP and CE + TM-bypass, mean number of medications was decreased (0.9 and 0.7, P<0.0001) with 56% and 48% off all medication. The most common AE were inflammation (6%) for CE + TM-bypass + CP group and VA loss (8%) for CE + TM-bypass.

Conclusion: At six months, a greater proportion of CE + TM-bypass + CP patients achieved IOP reduction of ≥20% and an IOP <18 mmHg on the same or fewer medications than for TM-bypass + CE.

Keywords: 360-degree viscodilation; MIGS; VISCO360®; canaloplasty; glaucoma; viscodilation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Mr Marius Heersink reports non-financial support from Sight Sciences, Inc., during the conduct of the study. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
(A) VISCO360® viscosurgical system. Illustration of the device showing a handpiece with a microcatheter, control wheel for advancing and retracting the microcatheter, viscoelastic reservoir/infusion pump and a locking mechanism. Images are sourced from Sight Sciences, http://sightsciences.com and used with permission. (B) The iStent® GTS100 trabecular bypass system. Images are sourced from Glaukos Corp., https://www.glaukos.com and used with permission.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Mean IOP (±SD) for all follow-up visits for both cohorts. *P<0.05 compared with baseline. Patients were kept on their preop IOP-lowering medication regimens until after their 1-month IOP assessment. N=86 eyes at preop and 1 month visit, 75 for the 3 month visit, and 72 for the 6 month visit for CE + TM-bypass + canaloplasty; N=100 eyes for the preop, 1 month, and 3 month visits, and 94 for the 6 month visit for CE + TM-Bypass. Abbreviations: CE, cataract extraction; TM-bypass, iStent GTS100; SD, standard deviation; IOP, intraocular pressure.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Percent mean changes in IOP over time for both cohorts. Patients were kept on their preop IOP-lowering medication regimens until after their 1-month IOP assessment. N=86 eyes at 1 month visit, 75 for the 3 month visit, and 72 for the 6 month visit for CE + TM-bypass + canaloplasty; N=100 eyes for the 1 month and 3 month visits, and 94 for the 6 month visit for CE + TM-bypass. *P<0.05 comparing the two treatment groups. Abbreviations: IOP, intraocular pressure; CE, cataract extraction; TM, trabecular meshwork.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Treatment success defined as: Proportion of eyes with a reduction of ≥20% from baseline and IOP <18 mmHg with the same or fewer numbers of IOP-lowering medications than preop for both cohorts. N=86 eyes at 1 month visit, 75 for the 3 month visit, and 72 for the 6 month visit for CE + TM-bypass + canaloplasty; N=100 eyes for the 1 month and 3 month visits, and 94 for the 6 month visit for CE + TM-bypass. *P<0.05 comparing the two treatment groups. Abbreviations: IOP, intraocular pressure; CE, cataract extraction; TTM., trabecular meshwork.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Mean number of IOP-lowering meds (±SD) for all follow-up visits for both cohorts. Patients were kept on their preop IOP-lowering medication regimens until after their 1-month IOP assessment. *P<0.0001 compared with baseline; †P<0.001 between groups. Patients were kept on their preop IOP-lowering medication regimens until after their 1-month IOP assessment. N=86 eyes for CE + TM-bypass + canaloplasty; N=100 eyes for CE + TM-bypass. Abbreviations: SD, standard deviation; IOP, intraocular pressure; TM, trabecular meshwork.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Proportion of eyes on no IOP-lowering medications. Patients were kept on their preop IOP-lowering medication regimens until after their 1-month IOP assessment. N=86 eyes at 3 month and 6 month visit for CE + TM-bypass + canaloplasty; N=100 eyes for the 3 month and 6 month visits for CE + TM-bypass. TM-bypass = iStent GTS100. *P<0.001 comparing the two treatment groups. Abbreviations: IOP, intraocular pressure; CE, cataract extraction; TM, trabecular meshwork.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Pillunat LE, Erb C, Junemann AG, Kimmich F. Micro-invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS): a review of surgical procedures using stents. Clin Ophthalmol. 2017;11:1583–1600. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S135316 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Saheb H, Ahmed II. Micro-invasive glaucoma surgery: current perspectives and future directions. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2012;23:96–104. doi:10.1097/ICU.0b013e32834ff1e7 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Feehan M, Munger MA, Cooper DK, et al. Adherence to glaucoma medications over 12 months in two US community pharmacy chains. J Clin Med. 2016;5. doi:10.3390/jcm5090079 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kashiwagi K, Matsubara M. Reduction in ocular hypotensive eyedrops by ab interno trabeculotomy improves not only ocular surface condition but also quality of vision. J Ophthalmol. 2018;2018:8165476. doi:10.1155/2018/8165476 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Baudouin C, Labbe A, Liang H, et al. Preservatives in eyedrops: the good, the bad and the ugly. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2010;29:312–334. doi:10.1016/j.preteyeres.2010.03.001 - DOI - PubMed