Ab interno supraciliary microstent surgery for open-angle glaucoma.

Abstract

Glaucoma is the leading cause of global irreversible blindness, oftenassociated with raised intraocular pressure (IOP). Where medical or laser treatment has failed or is not tolerated, surgery is often required. Minimally-invasive surgical approaches have been developed in recent years to reduce IOPwith lower surgical risks. Supraciliary microstent surgery for the treatment of open-angle glaucoma (OAG) is one such approach. To evaluatethe efficacy and safety of supraciliary microstent surgery for the treatment of OAG, and to compare with standard medical, laser or surgical treatments. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register; 2020, Issue 8); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; the ISRCTN registry; ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP. The date of the search was 27 August 2020. We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of supraciliary microstent surgery, alone or with cataract surgery, compared to other surgical treatments (cataract surgery alone, other minimally invasive glaucoma device techniques, trabeculectomy), laser treatment or medical treatment. Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts from the database search to identify studies that met the selection criteria. Data extraction, analysis, and evaluation of risk of bias from selected studies was performed independently and according to standard Cochrane methodology. One study met the inclusion criteria of this review, evaluating the efficacy and safety of the Cypasssupraciliary microstent surgery for the treatment of OAG, comparing phacoemulsification + supraciliary microstent surgery with phacoemulsification alone over 24 months. This study comprised 505 eyes of 505 participants with both OAG and cataract, 374 randomised to the phacoemulsification + microstent group. In this study, the perceived risk of bias from random sequence generation, allocation concealment and selective reporting was low. However, we considered the study to be at high risk of performance bias as surgeons/investigators were unmasked. Attrition bias was unclear, with 448/505 participants contributing to per protocol analysis. Insertion of a Cypass supraciliary microstent combined with phacoemulsification probably increases the proportion of participants who are medication-free (not using eye-drops) at 24 months compared with phacoemulsification alone (85% versus 59%, riskratio (RR) 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09 to 1.49, moderate-certainty evidence). There is high-certaintyevidence that agreater improvement in mean IOP occurs in the phacoemulsification + microstent group - mean (SD) change in IOP from baseline of -5.4 (3.9) mmHg in the phacoemulsification group, compared to -7.4 (4.4) mmHg in the phacoemulsification + microstent group at 24 months (mean difference-2.0 mmHg, 95% CI -2.85to -1.15). There is moderate-certainty evidence that insertion of a microstent is probably associated witha greater reduction in use of IOP-lowering drops (meanreduction of 0.7 medications in the phacoemulsification group, compared to a mean reduction of 1.2 medications in the phacoemulsification + microstent group). Insertion of a microstent during phacoemulsification may reduce the requirement for further glaucoma intervention to control IOP at a later stage compared to phacoemulsification alone (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.04, low-certainty evidence). There is no evidence relating to the rate of visual field progression, or proportion of participants whose visual field loss progressed in this study. There is moderate-certainty evidence showing little or no difference in the proportion of participants experiencing postoperative complications over 24 months between participants in the microstent group compared to those who received phacoemulsification alone (RR 1.1, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.4). Five year post-approval data regarding the safety of the Cypass supraciliary microstent showed increased endothelial cell loss, associated with the position of the microstent in the anterior chamber. There were no reportedhealth-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes in the included study. Data from this single RCTshow superiority of supraciliary microstent surgery when combined with phacoemulsification compared to phacoemulsification alone in achieving medication-free control of OAG. However, there are long-term safety concerns with the device used in this trial, relating to the observed significant loss of corneal endothelial cells atfive years following device implantation.At the time of this review, this device has been withdrawn from the market. This review has found that few high-quality studies existcomparing supraciliary microstent surgery to standard medical, laser or surgical glaucoma treatments. This should be addressed by further appropriately designed RCTs with sufficient long-term follow-up to ensure robust safety data areobtained. Consideration of health-related quality of life outcomes should also feature in trial design.