Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science Cover Image for Volume 65, Issue 7
June 2024
Volume 65, Issue 7
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2024
Effectiveness and Safety of the Gel Stent in Angle Closure Glaucoma With or Without Angle Widening: Post Hoc Analysis of a Prospective, Multicenter, Single-arm, Open-label Study
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Vanessa Vera
    AbbVie Inc, North Chicago, Illinois, United States
  • Eleonora Safyan
    AbbVie Inc, North Chicago, Illinois, United States
  • Michael Coote
    The Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Centre for Eye Research Australia Ltd, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Nathan Kerr
    The Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Centre for Eye Research Australia Ltd, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Paul Harasymowycz
    Bellevue Ophthalmology Clinics, Quebec, Canada
    Montreal Glaucoma Institute, Quebec, Canada
  • Chelvin C.A. Sng
    National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
  • Katherine W.X. Lun
    National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
  • Yuan-Chieh Lee
    Hualien Tzu Chi Hospital Buddhist Tzu Chi Medical Foundation, Hualien, Taiwan
  • Saumya Nagar
    AbbVie Inc, North Chicago, Illinois, United States
  • Daisy Yuan
    AbbVie Inc, North Chicago, Illinois, United States
  • Michael R Robinson
    AbbVie Inc, North Chicago, Illinois, United States
  • Susan Lee
    AbbVie Inc, North Chicago, Illinois, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Vanessa Vera AbbVie, Code E (Employment); Eleonora Safyan AbbVie, Code E (Employment); Michael Coote AbbVie, Code C (Consultant/Contractor), VividWhite, Code O (Owner); Nathan Kerr None; Paul Harasymowycz Alcon, Allergan (an AbbVie company), Bausch Health Canada, Glaukos, Ivantis, Johnson & Johnson, Nova Eye Medical, Santen Pharmaceutical, Code C (Consultant/Contractor); Chelvin Sng AbbVie, Alcon, Glaukos, Santen Pharmaceutical, Code C (Consultant/Contractor), Paul Glaucoma Implant, Code P (Patent); Katherine Lun None; Yuan-Chieh Lee None; Saumya Nagar AbbVie, Code E (Employment); Daisy Yuan AbbVie, Code E (Employment); Michael Robinson AbbVie, Code E (Employment); Susan Lee AbbVie, Code E (Employment)
  • Footnotes
    Support  This study was sponsored by Allergan, an AbbVie company. Medical writing support was provided by Evidence Scientific Solutions, Inc. (Philadelphia, PA) and funded by AbbVie.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2024, Vol.65, 3514. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Vanessa Vera, Eleonora Safyan, Michael Coote, Nathan Kerr, Paul Harasymowycz, Chelvin C.A. Sng, Katherine W.X. Lun, Yuan-Chieh Lee, Saumya Nagar, Daisy Yuan, Michael R Robinson, Susan Lee; Effectiveness and Safety of the Gel Stent in Angle Closure Glaucoma With or Without Angle Widening: Post Hoc Analysis of a Prospective, Multicenter, Single-arm, Open-label Study. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2024;65(7):3514.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : To report the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering effectiveness and safety of the gel stent in phakic patients with angle closure glaucoma (ACG) who also had angle-widening procedures (Group 1), and phakic (Group 2) and pseudophakic (Group 3) patients with ACG who did not have angle-widening procedures.

Methods : Eligible adults had ACG (ie, iridotrabecular contact in ≥2 quadrants, glaucomatous damage to the optic disc, and visual field loss); IOP 20-35 mmHg with medications and/or prior failed glaucoma surgery; and healthy/mobile conjunctiva in the target quadrant. Angle-widening procedures were permitted before ab-interno gel stent placement. Primary effectiveness endpoint: patients (%) achieving ≥20% IOP reduction from baseline at Month 12 without IOP-lowering medication increase (vs medically/surgically treated baseline). Key secondary effectiveness endpoints: mean IOP and medication count over time and changes from baseline. Safety endpoints included surgical complications and postoperative adverse events (AEs).

Results : Of 62 patients/eyes enrolled and implanted, 50 (80.6%), 4 (6.5%), and 8 (12.9%) were in Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The overall study completion rate was 95.2% (n=59/62). At baseline in Groups 1, 2, and 3, IOP was 23.8 (4.2), 26.1 (6.6), and 24.3 (4.0) mmHg on 2.3 (1.4), 2.5 (1.7), and 2.3 (1.6) IOP-lowering medications (means [SDs]), respectively. At Month 12 in those respective groups, 81.8% (95% CI, 67.3, 91.8), 75.0% (19.4, 99.4), and 87.5% (47.3, 99.7) of patients achieved the primary endpoint. The mean IOP reduction from baseline was -8.8 (95% CI, -10.2, -7.3; P<.01), -9.5 (95% CI, -20.9, 1.9), and -9.7 (95% CI, -13.0, -6.3; P<.01) mmHg. The mean IOP-lowering medication reduction was -1.5 (95% CI, -1.9, -1.1; P<.01), -1.8 (95% CI, -4.1, 0.6), and -1.9 (95% CI, -3.0, -0.7; P<.01). Overall, there were no surgical complications. Five (8.1%) study eyes had a serious postoperative ocular AE; all were resolved without sequalae, and none were unexpected.

Conclusions : Gel stent implantation effectively lowered IOP and the medication burden similarly in Groups 1, 2, and 3, with an acceptable safety profile. The mean change from baseline in IOP and medication number did not reach statistical significance in Group 2, possibly due to its small size (n=4).

This abstract was presented at the 2024 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Seattle, WA, May 5-9, 2024.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×