Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40128494›Full record

ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2025

Six-Month Outcomes from a Prospective, Randomized Study of iStent infinite Versus Hydrus in Open-Angle Glaucoma: The INTEGRITY Study.

Iqbal Ike K Ahmed, John P Berdahl, Arkadiy Yadgarov, George R Reiss, Steven R Sarkisian, Sébastien Gagné, Marco Robles, Lilit A Voskanyan, Omar Sadruddin, Dari Parizadeh and 4 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05127551 (A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, Comparitive Multicenter Clinical Study of Glaukos® Trabecular Micro-Bypass System Model iS3 Infinite® vs Competitor in Adult Subjects With Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05127551 naactive not recruitingnot on this map

A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, Comparitive Multicenter Clinical Study of Glaukos® Trabecular Micro-Bypass System Model iS3 Infinite® vs Competitor in Adult Subjects With Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma (POAG)

TypeinterventionalSponsorGlaukos CorporationRan2021 to 2025Enrolled179ConditionsGlaucoma, Glaucoma, Open-AngleArmsiStent Infinite, Competitor Device
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Iqbal Ike K AhmedPrism Eye Institute, 2201 Bristol Circle, Suite 100, Oakville, ON, L6H OJ8, Canada.
John P BerdahlVance Thompson Vision, 3101 West 57th Street, Sioux Falls, SD, 57108, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5468-7405
Arkadiy YadgarovOmni Eye Services, 5505 Peachtree-Dunwoody Rd., Suite 300, Atlanta, GA, 30342, USA.
George R ReissArizona Advanced Eye Research Institute, 6677 W. Thunderbird Rd. F-101, Glendale, AZ, 85306, USA.
Steven R SarkisianOklahoma Eye Surgeons, PLLC, 5600 N Portland Avenue, Oklahoma City, OK, 73112, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7633-2720
Sébastien GagnéInstitut de L'oeil Des Laurentides, 6110 R. Doris-Lussier, Boisbriand, QC, J7H 0E8, Canada.
Marco RoblesCentro Oftalmológico Robles, Central American Ophthalmic Research Consultants, LLC, Col Capitulo De Abogados Bloque 5, Santa Rosa De Copan, Honduras.
Lilit A VoskanyanOphthalmological Center After S.V. Malayan, 30 Fuchik Street, 0048, Yerevan, Armenia.
Omar SadruddinGlaukos Corporation, One Glaukos Way, Aliso Viejo, CA, 92656, USA.
Dari ParizadehGlaukos Corporation, One Glaukos Way, Aliso Viejo, CA, 92656, USA.
Jane Ellen GiamporcaroGlaukos Corporation, One Glaukos Way, Aliso Viejo, CA, 92656, USA.
Angela C KotheGlaukos Corporation, One Glaukos Way, Aliso Viejo, CA, 92656, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-7971-5292
L Jay KatzGlaukos Corporation, One Glaukos Way, Aliso Viejo, CA, 92656, USA.
Tomas NavratilGlaukos Corporation, One Glaukos Way, Aliso Viejo, CA, 92656, USA. tnavratil@glaukos.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-3577-3096

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThis was a prospective, randomized, double-masked, multicenter, 24-month study to compare effectiveness and safety outcomes following standalone implantation of two types of current generation trabecular stents in adults with open-angle glaucoma (OAG). An interim analysis was performed at month 6.

methodsEyes with OAG, mean IOP ≤ 24 mmHg on zero to three intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering medications at screening, and with baseline mean diurnal IOP (MDIOP) 21-36 mmHg after medication washout were randomized to standalone implantation of the current generation of three trabecular micro-bypass stents (iStent infinite) or one trabecular bypass stent (Hydrus). Eyes on medication were to undergo a medication washout prior to the month 6 visit. Analyses included a comparison of the proportion of iStent infinite versus Hydrus eyes achieving MDIOP reduction of 20% or greater from baseline at month 6. Reduction from baseline in MDIOP and number of medications were also assessed. Safety parameters included intraoperative/postoperative complications, corrected visual acuity, slit-lamp biomicroscopy, ophthalmoscopy, gonioscopy, perimetry, and adverse events.

resultsEyes with primarily mild-to-moderate disease severity were randomized: 91 iStent infinite eyes had screening mean (± standard deviation [SD]) IOP of 17.0 ± 3.2 mmHg on 1.6 ± 0.9 medications and baseline unmedicated MDIOP of 23.7 ± 2.9 mmHg; 89 Hydrus eyes had screening mean (± SD) IOP of 17.1 ± 3.3 mmHg on 1.5 ± 0.9 medications and baseline unmedicated MDIOP of 23.5 ± 2.7 mmHg. At month 6, a similar proportion of iStent infinite eyes (82.7%) versus Hydrus eyes (78.9%) achieved MDIOP reduction ≥ 20% from baseline regardless of IOP medication use or surgical complications. The difference was statistically significantly different (78.2% iStent infinite versus 65.0% Hydrus) for unmedicated MDIOP reduction ≥ 20% from baseline in eyes with no surgical complications (difference 13.2%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.0%, 23.3%). Mean MDIOP change from baseline, regardless of IOP medication use or surgical complications, was similar between groups (- 7.4 ± 2.9 mmHg iStent infinite and - 7.2 ± 2.9 mmHg Hydrus), whereas unmedicated MDIOP change from baseline without surgical complications was statistically significantly superior in iStent infinite eyes (- 6.8 ± 4.1 mmHg) versus Hydrus eyes (- 5.7 ± 4.1 mmHg) (difference - 1.1 mmHg; 95% CI - 2.0 mmHg, - 0.2 mmHg). Improper stent placement was reported in one iStent infinite and seven Hydrus eyes (1.1% versus 7.9%). One iStent infinite versus four Hydrus eyes experienced peripheral anterior synechiae > 1 mm (1.1% versus 4.5%). Overall, there were significantly fewer surgical complications in the iStent infinite eyes (3.3%) compared to Hydrus eyes (16.9%; difference of - 13.6%, 95% CI - 23.8%, - 3.4%).

conclusionsIn this study of standalone implantation of current trabecular stent technologies in subjects with OAG, high proportions in both groups achieved clinically meaningful IOP reduction. When considering surgical complications as failures, a statistically significantly greater proportion of iStent infinite eyes versus Hydrus eyes had no surgical complications and achieved an unmedicated MDIOP reduction of ≥ 20%. The iStent infinite group also had clinically relevant and statistically significantly superior reduction from baseline in unmedicated MDIOP without surgical complications compared to Hydrus.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT05127551.

Indexed as

HydrusIntraocular pressureiStent infiniteOpen-angle glaucomaStandalone implantationTrabecular micro-bypass stent

Identifiers

PMID40128494
PMCPMC12006583

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.