Predictors of success of iStent and iStent inject , when combined with cataract surgery

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (6) ◽  
pp. 848-851
Author(s):  
Philip Rothschild ◽  
Krishna Komzak ◽  
Joobin Hooshmand ◽  
Penelope Allen ◽  
Brendan Vote ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Maria Fea ◽  
Francesco Cattel ◽  
Stefano Gandolfi ◽  
Giorgio Buseghin ◽  
Gianluca Furneri ◽  
...  

Abstract BackgroundGlaucoma is a disease characterized by progressive damage of the optic nerve. Several therapeutic options are available to lower intraocular pressure (IOP). In primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) patients with inadequate IOP control (or controlled with multiple medical therapies or for whom medical therapy is contraindicated), the implantation of micro-invasive glaucoma surgery devices (MIGS) and concomitant cataract surgery has proved to be more effective in reducing intraocular pressure (IOP), as compared to cataract surgery alone. The objective of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of iStent inject® device with concurrent cataract surgery vs. cataract surgery alone, in patients with mild-to-moderate POAG, adopting the Italian National Health Service (NHS) perspective.MethodsSimulation of outcomes and costs was undertaken using a Markov model with 4 health states and one-month cycles, that is used to simulate the prognosis of these patients. Efficacy data were obtained from the randomized clinical trial (RCT). A lifetime horizon was adopted in the analysis. A discount rate of 3.5% was applied to both costs and effects. The Italian National Healthcare Service (NHS) perspective was considered, therefore only healthcare direct costs (acquisition of main interventions and subsequent procedures; medications; monitoring and follow-up; adverse events). Model robustness was tested through sensitivity analyses. ResultsResults of the base-case analysis showed that the total lifetime costs were higher in the iStent inject® + concurrent cataract surgery, compared with the cataract surgery alone group (€8,368.51 vs. €7,134.71 respectively). iStent inject® + concurrent cataract surgery was cost-effective vs. cataract surgery alone, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €13,037.01 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Both one-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed robustness of base-case results. The acceptability curve of cost-effectiveness (CEAC) analysis showed that iStent inject® + cataract surgery would have a 98% probability of being cost-effective, compared to cataract surgery alone, when the willingness to pay (WTP) is equal to €50,000 per QALY gained.ConclusionsThe results of the cost-utility analysis confirm that iStent inject® + cataract surgery is a cost-effective option for the treatment of patients affected by mild-to-moderate POAG, compared with cataract surgery alone, when evaluated from the Italian NHS perspective. Trial registration: Not applicable


2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricardo Augusto Paletta Guedes ◽  
Daniela Marcelo Gravina ◽  
Jonathan Clive Lake ◽  
Vanessa Maria Paletta Guedes ◽  
Alfredo Chaoubah

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Raphael Neuhann ◽  
Tobias Neuhann

Abstract Background The study aimed to investigate the 24-month safety and efficacy of implantation of two second-generation iStent inject trabecular micro-bypass stents with concomitant cataract surgery. Methods This consecutive case series included 164 eyes of 109 patients implanted with the iStent inject® device with concomitant cataract surgery. The series was comprised of eyes with primary open-angle glaucoma (n = 84), pseudoexfoliation glaucoma (n = 42), normal-tension glaucoma (n = 18), and ocular hypertension (n = 20). All 164 eyes reached 9–14 months of follow-up (“12-month consistent cohort”), with a subset of 88 eyes reaching 21–26 months of follow-up (“24-month consistent cohort”). Performance outcome measures included intraocular pressure (IOP) and number of glaucoma medications. Safety outcomes included intra- or postoperative complications, the need for secondary procedures and corrected distance visual acuity. Comparisons of change in continuous (e.g., IOP) and categorical (e.g., proportions of eyes on zero medications) measures between baseline and postoperative times were made with the paired t-test and McNemar’s chi-squared test, respectively. Results At 12 months postoperatively, IOP was reduced by 25.5% (from 20.0 ± 5.5 mmHg to 14.9 ± 2.0 mmHg; p < 0.001); at 24 months postoperatively, IOP was reduced by 26.6% (from 20.3 ± 6.1 mmHg to 14.9 ± 1.9 mmHg; p < 0.001). At 12 months postoperatively, mean number of glaucoma medications was reduced by 85.0% (from 2.0 ± 1.0 to 0.3 ± 0.8 medications; p < 0.001); at 24 months postoperatively, mean number of medications was reduced by 81.0% (from 2.1 ± 1.1 to 0.4 ± 0.8 medications; p < 0.001). After 12 months, 96.3% of eyes had an IOP ≤ 18 mmHg and 58.5% of eyes had an IOP ≤ 15 mmHg, with 81.1% of eyes free of any medication, compared to 1.8% of eyes medication-free in the 12-month cohort at baseline. After 24 months, 98.9% of eyes had an IOP ≤ 18 mmHg and 53.4% of eyes had an IOP ≤ 15 mmHg, with 72.7% free of medication compared to 1.1% of eyes medication-free in the 24-month cohort at baseline. Overall, a high safety profile was observed with no significant postoperative complications. Conclusions The insertion of iStent inject (comprised of two second-generation trabecular micro-bypass stents) with cataract surgery effectively provides a sustained reduction in IOP with a markedly improved medication burden up to 24 months postoperatively.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document