4.6 Article

1-year outcomes of the Xen45 glaucoma implant

Journal

EYE
Volume 33, Issue 5, Pages 761-766

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41433-018-0310-1

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives To describe the 12-month outcomes of the Xen45 glaucoma stent. Methods Non-comparative retrospective study of all cases who underwent Xen glaucoma surgery in April 2017 or earlier and completed 12 months of follow-up. The primary outcome measures were intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction and number of glaucoma medications at 12 months postoperatively. The secondary outcome measures were surgical complications and the success rate of surgery at 1 year. Success rate was defined according to the multiple IOP thresholds of 15 mmHg, 18 mmHg, and 21 mmHg with all requiring a drop of 20% and no additional glaucoma surgery. Revision or needling of the Xen conjunctival bleb was not considered to constitute a surgical failure. Results Sixty-eight eyes were included in the study. Mean TOP dropped from 22.1 mmHg preoperatively to 14.8 mmHg at 12 months, a 33% drop (p < 0.0001). Mean number of glaucoma medications reduced from 2.9 preoperatively to 1.1 at 12 months (p < 0.0001). In total, 54.4% of cases were back on glaucoma medications by 12 months. Success rate varied from 32.4% when defined as IOP <= 15 mmHg and >= 6 mmHg >= 20% reduction without medications to 70.6% when defined as IOP <= 21 mmHg and >= 6 mmHg and >= 20% reduction with or without medications. Thirty cases (44.1%) required bleb needling or surgical revision. Conclusions The Xen45 is effective at reducing TOP and glaucoma medication use at 12 months postoperatively. Patients considering this procedure should be warned that by 12 months postoperatively there is a significant chance of requiring postoperative bleb intervention and glaucoma drops.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available