ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2025
Real-World Data of the First UK Series of MINIject Supraciliary Glaucoma Implant with 6 Months Follow-Up.
Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study evaluates the efficacy and safety of the MINIject (iStar Medical, Wavre, Belgium) supraciliary implant for the treatment of glaucoma.
methodsPatients with medically uncontrolled primary open angle glaucoma, primary angle closure glaucoma and normal tension glaucoma were included. This first in the UK, retrospective, single-centre, interventional study evaluated the implantation of the MINIject in 50 eyes, including 11 stand-alone cases and 39 cases combined with phacoemulsification. The primary outcome was mean reduction of intraocular pressure (IOP) at 6 months. We also report the proportion of eyes that achieved a final IOP ≤ 21 mmHg and > 5 mmHg with an IOP reduction of ≥ 20% with/without medication use.
resultsMean (± standard deviation) baseline IOP was 18.4 ± 4.7 mmHg on 2.1 ± 1.1 medications. There was a significant decrease in IOP at 6 months (-6.3; 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.9 to -9.7 mmHg, P < 0.001). There was no significant association between diagnosis, mode of delivery (stand-alone/combined with phacoemulsification) and the degree of IOP lowering. There was a significant decrease in IOP-lowering medications at 6 months (-2.1; 95% CI -1.6 to -2.6 mmHg, P < 0.001). A total of 88.9% of eyes achieved a final IOP ≤ 21 mmHg and > 5 mmHg, whilst 57.8% of eyes achieved this combined with 20% reduction in IOP. Adverse events occurred in 15.6% (n = 7) of eyes. No sight-threatening events occurred.
conclusionsThis study shows promising IOP-lowering results and medication reduction over 6 months with few adverse events.
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.