ArticleEye (London, England)2025
In vitro flow properties of Preserflo Michroshunt with an intraluminal stent.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the impact of varying stent sizes and materials on the outflow of the Preserflo Microshunt (PMS).
methodsIn vitro experiments were conducted using five new PMS samples. Intraluminal stents of two materials (nylon and polypropylene) and two sizes (9-0 and 10-0) were tested. Flow was measured using a balanced saline solution (BSS) under a constant hydrostatic pressure, and the resistance was calculated. Theoretical calculations based on the Hagen-Poiseuille law were compared with in vitro results, and the results were corrected to calculate resistance to flow using aqueous humour properties. Five measurements were obtained for each material and size.
resultsWithout any stent, the median resistance internal to PMS corrected for aqueous humour viscosity was 1.59 mmHg/µL/min. Median resistances were 6.35 mmHg/µL/min (range: 3.88-7.42) for the 10-0 nylon and, 11.79 mmHg/µL/min (range: 7.08-13.71) for the 10-0 polypropylene. The 9-0 stents showed higher resistance: 10.99 mmHg/µL/min (range: 7.34-22.75) for 9-0 nylon, finally, the 9-0 polypropylene resulted in a resistance of 37.55 mmHg/µL/min (range: 36.52-38.41).
conclusionsThis study indicates that the tested suture materials and sizes have a significant impact on the outflow resistance of the PMS device. Larger sutures and/or polypropylene materials seem to offer more resistance to aqueous outflow.
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.