ArticleBMJ open ophthalmology2025
Minimally invasive glaucoma surgery: comparison of Hydrus microstent with iStent
Article in BMJ open ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Hydrus microstent versus triple iStent inject W combined with phacoemulsification for glaucoma management: three-year outcomes.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
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 evaluate and compare the efficacy of a single Hydrus and double iStent
methodsThe study was designed as a prospective comparative case series. Patients with POAG undergoing trabecular microbypass stent insertion in addition to cataract surgery were recruited and consent was obtained. Baseline demographic information and preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes including intraocular pressure (IOP), visual acuity and topical glaucoma medication use were recorded and analysed. Treatment outcomes were analysed after propensity score matching to adjust for baseline differences between the two groups. Primary success was defined as an IOP of ≤18 and ≥20% IOP reduction at 12 months; other outcomes included IOP ≤15 mm Hg and ≤21 mm Hg. These were measured against complete success (no medications) and qualified success (one or more medications).
resultsThe study comprised 85 eyes in the Hydrus group and 100 eyes in the iStent
conclusionAfter adjusting for baseline differences, there was no statistically significant difference between combined Hydrus microstent implantation and cataract surgery when compared with the iStent
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.