ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2026
Preserflo MicroShunt Outcomes in Rare and Refractory Glaucoma Entities Compared with Matched Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma Controls: A Retrospective Exploratory Study.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the efficacy and safety of the Preserflo MicroShunt (PMS) in rare and refractory glaucoma entities (RRG) in comparison with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG). Patients and Methods: In this retrospective exploratory study, the primary outcome was the complete 1-year success rate (≥20% reduction in IOP from baseline and ≤18 mmHg with no medication use). Kaplan-Meier estimates were compared between RRG and POAG (matched 1:1) using the log-rank test. Exploratory sub-analyses were performed for each RRG subgroup. The secondary outcomes included bleb revision and complication rates. Results: Eighty eyes were included in the RRG group (8 primary congenital (PCG), 11 juvenile open-angle (JOAG), 10 aphakic (AG), 14 combined mechanisms (CMG), 17 neovascular (NVG), 13 post-traumatic (TG), 4 oil-induced, 2 steroid-induced glaucoma, and 1 with idiopathically elevated episcleral venous pressure) and matched to 80 eyes with POAG based on baseline characteristics. The 1-year success rates were 56% in the RRG and 71% in the POAG groups (p = 0.0079). Exploratory subgroup analyses revealed significantly lower success in PCG (2/8), TG (8/13) and NVG (8/17). Success rates in the other groups were not significantly different from POAG. Bleb revisions were required significantly more frequently in the RRG group (58% vs 41%). Severe complications were observed in the RRG group, but did not reach significance. Conclusions: While the PMS demonstrated lower efficacy in RRG compared to POAG overall, this difference was primarily attributable to worse outcomes in NVG, TG, and PCG. Success rates in AG, JOAG, and CMG were not significantly different from POAG controls. The frequent need for postoperative bleb revisions, particularly in NVG, PCG, and TG subgroups, represents an important practical consideration. Given the small subgroup sizes and exploratory design, these findings warrant validation in larger, prospective studies.
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.