MINIMALLY INVASIVE GLAUCOMA SURGICAL TECHNIQUES FOR OPEN- ANGLE GLAUCOMA: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/w7v03m86Keywords:
Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery, Open-Angle GlaucomaAbstract
Background: Glaucoma affects more than 75 million people worldwide. Intraocular pressure (IOP)–lowering surgery is an important treatment for this disease. Interest in reducing surgical morbidity has led to the introduction of minimally invasive glaucoma surgeries (MIGS). Understanding the comparative effectiveness and safety of MIGS is necessary for clinicians and patients.
Methods: By comparing itself to the standards set by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and MetaAnalysis (PRISMA) 2020, this study was able to show that it met all of the requirements. So, the experts were able to make sure that the study was as up-to-date as it was possible to be. For this search approach, publications that came out between 2013 and 2023 were taken into account. Several different online reference sources, like Pubmed and SagePub, were used to do this. It was decided not to take into account review pieces, works that had already been published, or works that were only half done.
Result: In the PubMed database, the results of our search brought up 318 articles, whereas the results of our search on SagePub brought up 34 articles. The results of the search conducted for the last year of 2013 yielded a total 13 articles for PubMed and 12 articles for SagePub. In the end, we compiled a total of 5 papers, 4 of which came from PubMed and 1 of which came from SagePub. We included five research that met the criteria.
Conclusion: Although MIGS seem efficient in the reduction of the IOP and glaucoma medication and show good safety profile, this evidence is mainly derived from non-comparative studies and further, good quality RCTs are warranted.
References
Newman-Casey PA, Robin AL, Blachley T, Farris K, Heisler M, Resnicow K, et al. Most Common Barriers to Glaucoma Medication Adherence: A Cross-Sectional Survey. Ophthalmology [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2023 Dec 8];122(7):1308–16. Available from:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4485580/
Bicket AK, Le JT, Azuara-Blanco A, Gazzard G, Wormald R, Bunce C, et al. Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgical Techniques for Open-Angle Glaucoma. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2021;139(9):1–7.
Li T, Lindsley K, Rouse B, Hong H, Shi Q, Friedman DS, et al. Comparative Effectiveness of First-line Medications for Primary Open Angle Glaucoma – A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.
Ophthalmology [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2023 Dec 8];123(1):129–40. Available from:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4695285/
Fellman RL, Mattox C, Singh K, Flower B, Francis BA, Robin AL, et al. American Glaucoma Society Position Paper: Microinvasive Glaucoma Surgery. Ophthalmol Glaucoma. 2020;3(1):1–6.
Spaeth GL, Cvintal V, Figueiredo A. Is There a Need for New Surgical Procedures for Glaucoma?
Yes! Open Ophthalmol J [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2023 Dec 8];9:101–3. Available from:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4460226/
Richter GM, Coleman AL. Minimally invasive glaucoma surgery: current status and future prospects.
Clin Ophthalmol [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2023 Dec 8];10:189–206. Available from:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4734795/
Manassess DT, Au L. The New Era of Glaucoma Micro-stent Surgery. Ophthalmol Ther [Internet].
[cited 2023 Dec 8];5(2):135–46. Available from:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5125116/
Klamann MKJ, Gonnermann J, Maier AKB, Ruokonen PC, Torun N, Joussen AM, et al. Combined clear cornea phacoemulsification in the treatment of pseudoexfoliative glaucoma associated with cataract: significance of trabecular aspiration and ab interno trabeculectomy. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2013;251(9):2195–9.
Fea AM, Belda JI, Rekas M, Junemann A, Chang L, Pablo L, et al. Prospective unmasked randomized evaluation of the iStent inject® versus two ocular hypotensive agents in patients with primary openangle glaucoma. Clin Ophthalmol. 2014;8:875–82.
Katz LJ, Erb C, Carceller GA, Fea AM, Voskanyan L, Wells JM, et al. Prospective, randomized study of one, two, or three trabecular bypass stents in open-angle glaucoma subjects on topical hypotensive medication. Clin Ophthalmol. 2015;9:2313–20.
Fea AM, Consolandi G, Zola M, Pignata G, Cannizzo P, Lavia C, et al. Micro-Bypass Implantation for Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma Combined with Phacoemulsification: 4-Year Follow-Up. J Ophthalmol . 2015;
Kurji K, Rudnisky CJ, Rayat JS, Arora S, Sandhu S, Damji KF, et al. Phaco-trabectome versus phacoiStent in patients with open-angle glaucoma. Can J Ophthalmol. 2017;52(1):99–106.
Gumani B, Tripathy K. Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery. StatPearls [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2023 Dec 8]; Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK582156/
Lavia C, Dallorto L, Maule M, Ceccarelli M, Fea AM. Minimally-invasive glaucoma surgeries (MIGS) for open angle glaucoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2017;12(8).
SooHoo JR, Seibold LK, Radcliffe NM, Kahook MY. Minimally invasive glaucoma surgery: current implants and future innovations. Can J Ophthalmol. 2014;49(6):528–33.
Mathew DJ, Buys YM. Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery: A Critical Appraisal of the Literature. Annu Rev Vis Sci. 2020;15(6):47–89.
Ahmed IIK. MIGS and the FDA: What’s in a Name? Ophthalmology. 2015;
Bloom P, Au L. “Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery (MIGS) Is a Poor Substitute for
Trabeculectomy”—The Great Debate. Ophthalmol Ther [Internet]. 2018;7:203–10. Available from: https://doi.org/10.6084/
Gedde SJ, Chen PP, Heuer DK, Singh K, Wright MM, Feuer WJ, et al. The Primary Tube Versus Trabeculectomy Study: Methodology of a Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Tube Shunt Surgery and Trabeculectomy with Mitomycin C. Ophthalmology. 2018;125(5):774–81.
Agrawal P, Bradshaw SE. Systematic Literature Review of Clinical and Economic Outcomes of MicroInvasive Glaucoma Surgery (MIGS) in Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma. Ophthalmol Ther. 2018;49– 73.
Balas M, Mathew DJ. Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery: A Review of the Literature. Vol. 7, Vision (Switzerland). Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI); 2023.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
