ArticleAdvances in therapy2026
Travoprost Intracameral Implant as a Standalone Procedure or Combined with Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery (MIGS).
Article in Advances in therapy, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe primary objective of this study was to report real-world outcomes of the travoprost intracameral implant (iDose TR) as standalone surgery or combined with minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS). The secondary objective was to compare efficacy across subgroups stratified by surgical category, severity, and race/ethnicity.
methodsThis was a retrospective nonrandomized single-center consecutive case series of iDose TR implantations, with or without MIGS. Inclusion criteria were primary open-angle glaucoma, mild-to-severe stage, and minimum 3 months' follow-up. Eyes with visually significant cataract undergoing combined surgery also underwent concomitant phacoemulsification. Efficacy endpoints were mean and proportional analyses of IOP and medication burden (at baseline vs 3 months).
resultsThe study included 85 eyes. iDose TR was a standalone procedure in 40 eyes (47.1%) and combined with MIGS in 45 eyes (52.9%): iDose + iStent infinite (n = 22), iDose + iStent infinite + phacoemulsification (n = 16), and iDose + other MIGS ± phacoemulsification (n = 7). IOP and medication burden reduced significantly from 17.2 ± 5.1 and 1.9 ± 1.1 mmHg preoperatively to 14.5 ± 4.3 and 0.9 ± 0.9 mmHg at 3 months in all eyes (p < 0.001). Subgroup analyses revealed significant reductions in IOP and medication burden across all subgroups with no significant between-subgroup differences, except in the surgical category analysis which showed statistically significantly greater medication reduction after combined procedures than standalone procedures. There were no intraoperative complications. Postoperatively, IOP elevation (n = 1) and branch retinal vein occlusion (n = 1) were observed. No secondary glaucoma interventions were required.
conclusioniDose TR achieved significant and safe IOP and medication reduction when performed as standalone surgery or combined with trabecular outflow-based MIGS with or without concomitant phacoemulsification. Greater medication-reducing effect was observed following combined iDose TR + MIGS surgery than with standalone iDose TR implantation. Study limitations include the short follow-up, nonrandomized design, and small, unmatched subgroups; further randomized studies with large, matched cohorts will be helpful to validate these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42678487What 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.