ArticlePloS one2026
Comparative outcomes of PreserFloTMMicroShunt in primary open-angle and pseudoexfoliative glaucoma: A matched analysis.
Article in PloS one, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeComparing outcomes of PreserFloTM MicroShunt in eyes with primary open-angle (POAG) and pseudoexfoliative glaucoma (PEXG) through a matched analysis.
methodsRetrospective matched-pair analysis of patients undergoing PreserFloTM MicroShunt (PFMS) due to POAG (n = 25) and PEXG (n = 25). Success rates (A/B: IOP ≤ 21 / 18 mmHg + IOP reduction ≥20% from baseline; C: IOP ≤ 15 mmHg + IOP reduction ≥25%; D: IOP ≤ 12 mmHg + IOP reduction ≥30%) and secondary outcomes were evaluated.
resultsFifty eyes of 49 patients were included. At 12 months, complete and qualified success rates for Criteria A - D were 68.0% and 96.0%, 68.0% and 96.0%, 64.0% and 72.0%, and 32.0% and 32.0%, respectively, in the POAG group, compared with 44.0% and 76.0%, 40.0% and 72.0%, 32.0% and 52.0%, and 8.0% and 12.0%, respectively, in the PEXG group (p = 0.039, 0.024, 0.189, and 0.271, respectively). Mean preoperative IOP decreased from 25.12 mmHg (POAG) and 25.64 mmHg (PEXG, p = 0.98) to 12.64 mmHg and 15.04 mmHg postoperatively (p = 0.043). The mean number of IOP-lowering drops was significantly lower in eyes with POAG (0.52 ± 1.01) than with PEXG (1.3 ± 1.55; p = 0.031) after 12 months. Eyes with PEXG had significantly higher rates of postoperative complications than eyes with POAG (p = 0.038) with no vision-threatening sequelae.
conclusionsPFMS is a safe and effective procedure for reducing IOP in eyes with POAG and PEXG, with lower IOP levels being achieved in eyes with POAG. Significantly more postoperative complications and interventions were needed in eyes with PEXG.
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.