ArticleBMC ophthalmology2022
Comparison of surgical outcomes with and without Ologen collagen matrix augmentation during XEN gel stent implantation.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of XEN45 Gel Stent Outcomes in Glaucoma: Ab Externo Open-Conjunctiva Approach with Ologen vs. Ab Interno Closed-Conjunctiva Approach.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- One-Year Real-World Outcomes of Ab-Externo Gel Stent Placement From the EXPAND Study.Journal of glaucoma · 2025Article
- One-Year Outcomes of Ab Externo XEN45 Gel Stent Implantation with an Open Conjunctiva Approach in Patients with Open-Angle Glaucoma.Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo compare the surgical outcomes and postoperative complications with and without Ologen collagen matrix augmentation during XEN gel stent implantation.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent XEN gel stent implantation with an ab externo technique. The amount of intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction, percentage of postoperative complications and additional management, and surgical success defined as IOP reduction greater than 20% compared with the preoperative IOP measurement were compared between Ologen-augmented and non-augmented groups. Groups of patients who underwent XEN gel stent implantation alone and combined with phacoemulsification were analyzed separately.
resultsA total 103 eyes of 103 participants were included. Of those, 72 eyes underwent standalone XEN gel stent implantation: 42 eyes with Ologen augmentation (Oloxen group) and 30 eyes without Ologen augmentation (Xen group). Thirty-one eyes underwent XEN gel stent implantation with phacoemulsification: 19 eyes with Ologen augmentation (Phaco-Oloxen group) and 12 eyes without Ologen augmentation (PhacoXen group). The surgical success rate at six months postoperatively was not different between the Oloxen and Xen groups (56.4% vs 43.3%, P > 0.05) or between the Phaco-Oloxen group and PhacoXen group (57.9% vs 41.7%, P > 0.05). The prevalence of postoperative hypotony, 5-fluorouracil injections, use of anti-glaucoma medications, bleb needling, and additional glaucoma surgeries was not different between the Oloxen and Xen groups or between the Phaco-Oloxen and PhacoXen groups when assessed six months postoperatively.
conclusionsAll groups showed significant IOP reduction after XEN gel stent implantation, but there was no significant difference between the Ologen collagen matrix augmented and non-augmented groups in surgical outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.