ArticleEye and vision (London, England)2026
Surgical outcomes of trabecular micro-bypass minimally invasive glaucoma surgery devices in eyes with high myopia: a 24-month retrospective multicenter cohort study.
Article in Eye and vision (London, England), 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo describe outcomes of two trabecular bypass minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) devices in highly myopic (HM) eyes with glaucoma up to 24 months postoperatively.
methodsA retrospective, observational multicenter study of HM eyes (phakic refractive spherical equivalent ≤ -6 D and/or axial length ≥ 26 mm) undergoing trabecular bypass MIGS between January 2019 and December 2023. Changes in intraocular pressure (IOP), anti-glaucoma medications and visual acuity, and rates of complications including hyphema, peripheral anterior synechiae and significant IOP elevation, defined as ≥ 30 mmHg or an increase of ≥ 6 mmHg from preoperative IOP, were recorded. IOP outcome criteria and surgical success were reported per European Glaucoma Society and American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) guidelines, respectively. Linear mixed models were used for continuous variables, logistic regression for categorical variables and cluster-adjusted Cox regression to compare survival between groups.
resultsTwo hundred and fifty-two eyes of 207 subjects across three centers were studied. One hundred and twenty-eight eyes received iStent inject and 124 received Hydrus microstent; 96.1% of iStent and 100% of Hydrus eyes underwent combined phacoemulsification. At 24 months postoperatively, ≥ 20% IOP reduction with anti-glaucoma medications (AGMs) was achieved by 35.8% (Hydrus) or 30.0% (iStent); or without AGM 13.4% (Hydrus) or 6.67% (iStent). Drop-freedom was achieved by 48.7% (Hydrus) or 38.5% (iStent). An IOP of ≤ 15 mmHg with AGM was achieved by 55.2% (Hydrus) or 63.3% (iStent); or without AGM 28.4% (Hydrus) or 21.7% (iStent). The 12-month cumulative risk of failure to maintain ≥ 20% IOP reduction with AGM was 86.7% (Hydrus) or 90.3% (iStent); or without AGM 90.1% (Hydrus) or 92.5% (iStent). Surgical success based on AAO guidelines was attained by 60.5% (Hydrus) or 53.8% (iStent) of eyes. Significant IOP elevation was the most common complication (4.84% Hydrus; 4.54% iStent), followed by hyphema (0.8% Hydrus; 4.5% iStent) at 1 month postoperatively. Outcomes did not differ significantly between the Hydrus and iStent groups.
conclusionsBoth iStent inject and Hydrus microstent achieved modest IOP-lowering efficacy and low complication rates in HM eyes. Neither device exceeded the minimal clinically important difference proposed for MIGS combined with cataract surgery.
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.