Advertisement

The STARflo™ glaucoma implant: a single-centre experience at 24 months

  • Sofia FiliEmail author
  • Lama Janoud
  • Iraklis Vastardis
  • Peter Wölfelschneider
  • Markus Kohlhaas
Glaucoma
  • 11 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the 24-month outcomes following STARflo™ implantation in patients with moderate or advanced open-angle glaucoma.

Methods

We enrolled 32 patients (40 eyes) with high intraocular pressure (IOP) resistant to topical and systemic medical therapy. After baseline assessments, patients were implanted with STARflo™ implants with the goal of IOP reduction and long-term maintenance. Patients were followed for 24 months. Complete success of implantation was defined as a restoration of normal IOP without topical glaucoma medications, while qualified success was defined as a restoration of normal IOP with implantation and topical glaucoma medications.

Results

STARflo™ did not satisfactorily reduce IOP at 24 months. Twenty-eight eyes (70%) had elevated IOP at least once during the 24 months post-implantation period. Five eyes (12.5%) developed corneal decompensation. The average IOP 24 months after the surgery was 13.42 ± 6.03 mmHg and was not significantly different than IOP at 12 months (13.2 ± 5.59 mmHg). Moreover, 45% of treated eyes needed additional glaucoma procedures after 1 year and 2 years to achieve these IOPs. STARflo™ did reduce the average number of topical glaucoma medications from 2.7 pre-implantation to 1.17 at 24 months postoperatively in the rest 55% of the eyes.

Conclusions

The STARflo™ implantation did not meet success criteria and so appears to be an ineffective alternative to filtering surgical procedures for patients with treatment-refractory open-angle glaucoma.

Keywords

STARflo™ implant Intraocular pressure Glaucoma Loss of corneal endothelial cells Corneal decompensation 

Abbreviations

ALT

argon laser trabeculoplasty

BAGS

blebless ab-externo glaucoma surgery

CDR

cup-to-disc ratio

DMEK

Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty

ECD

corneal endothelial cell density

MD

mean deviation

MIGS

micro-invasive glaucoma surgery

PC-IOL

posterior chamber intraocular lenses

PEX

pseudoexfoliation

POAG

primary open-angle glaucoma

PSD

pattern standard deviation

SLT

selective laser trabeculoplasty

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee of St. Johannes Hospital in Dortmund, Germany, and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was freely given and obtained from all participants in this study.

References

  1. 1.
    Klemm M, Balazs A, Draeger J et al (1995) Experimental use of space-retaining substances with extended duration: functional and morphological results. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 233:592–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kammer JA, Mundy KM (2015) Suprachoroidal devices in Glaucoma surgery. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol 22:45–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fili S, Wölfelschneider P, Kohlhaas M (2018) The STARflo glaucoma implant: preliminary 12 months results. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 256:773–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Figus M, Lazzeri S, Fogagnolo P, Iester M, Martinelli P, Nardi M (2011) Supraciliary shunt in refractory glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 95:1537–1541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lane S “Overview of the results from the 5 yr follow up study of the CyPass MicroStent,” presented at the XXXVI Congress of the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons, Vienna, Austria, September 2018. Available at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jl1JhJjHXNnYXwJ8BCPb4xNlIsZDtxJ5/ view. Accessed March 11
  6. 6.
    Omatsu S, Hirooka K, Nitta E, Ukegawa K (2018) Changes in corneal endothelial cells after trabeculectomy and EX-PRESS shunt: 2-year follow-up. BMC Ophthalmol 18:243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Toyokawa N, Araki-Sasaki K, Nambu H, Kimura H, Kuroda S (2018) Changes of corneal endothelial cell density after EX-PRESS® Glaucoma shunt implantation: 2-year follow-up study. J Clin Ophthalmol 2:41–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lee EK, Yun YJ, Lee JE, Yim JH, Kim CS (2009) Changes in corneal endothelial cells after Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation: 2-year follow-up. J Ophthalmol 148:361–367Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Iwasaki K, Arimura S, Takihara Y, Takamura Y, Inatani M (2018) Prospective cohort study of corneal endothelial cell loss after Baerveldt glaucoma implantation. PLoS One 13(7)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Naoki T, Atsushi H, Akio M (2015) Corneal decompensation following filtering surgery with the Ex-PRESS® mini glaucoma shunt device. Clin Ophthalmol 9:499–502Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yamamoto Y, Uno T, Shisida K, Xue L, Shiraishi A, Zheng X, Ohashi Y (2006) Demonstration of aqueous streaming through a laser iridotomy window against the corneal endothelium. Arch Ophthalmol 124:387–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of OphthalmologySt. Johannes HospitalDortmundGermany

Personalised recommendations