OBJECTIVE: To investigate efficacy and safety of phaco-trabectome (PT) versus phaco-iStent (Pi) for intraocular pressure (IOP) control in open-angle glaucoma (OAG). DESIGN: Retrospective comparative case series. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 70 eyes of 55 patients with OAG underwent either PT surgery by a single surgeon or Pi (insertion of 2 stents) by another surgeon in Canada between January 2010 and December 2012. METHODS: The medical records of consecutive adult patients who underwent either PT or Pi surgery were reviewed. All patients who satisfied both the inclusion and exclusion criteria were included in the outcomes analyses. IOP reduction, reduction in glaucoma medication, safety profile, and best-corrected visual acuity were evaluated. RESULTS: Thirty-six eyes of 30 patients had PT and 34 eyes of 25 patients had Pi. Baseline IOP was higher in the PT group (20.92 ± 5.07 mm Hg) than in the Pi group (17.47 ± 4.87 mm Hg; p = 0.026). At 12 months there was no significant difference between groups in relative reduction of mean IOP (PT -5.09 ± 5.73, 24% relative reduction vs. Pi -3.84 ± 3.80, 22% relative reduction; p = 0.331) or glaucoma medication use (PT -0.49 ± 1.17 vs. Pi -0.26 ± 0.73; p = 0.168) from baseline. However, Pi had significantly fewer individual complications (PT 20 vs. Pi 5; p < 0.0001) throughout the postoperative period. CONCLUSION: At 12 months of follow-up, both techniques significantly lowered IOP, but fewer complications were observed in the Pi group.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate efficacy and safety of phaco-trabectome (PT) versus phaco-iStent (Pi) for intraocular pressure (IOP) control in open-angle glaucoma (OAG). DESIGN: Retrospective comparative case series. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 70 eyes of 55 patients with OAG underwent either PT surgery by a single surgeon or Pi (insertion of 2 stents) by another surgeon in Canada between January 2010 and December 2012. METHODS: The medical records of consecutive adult patients who underwent either PT or Pi surgery were reviewed. All patients who satisfied both the inclusion and exclusion criteria were included in the outcomes analyses. IOP reduction, reduction in glaucoma medication, safety profile, and best-corrected visual acuity were evaluated. RESULTS: Thirty-six eyes of 30 patients had PT and 34 eyes of 25 patients had Pi. Baseline IOP was higher in the PT group (20.92 ± 5.07 mm Hg) than in the Pi group (17.47 ± 4.87 mm Hg; p = 0.026). At 12 months there was no significant difference between groups in relative reduction of mean IOP (PT -5.09 ± 5.73, 24% relative reduction vs. Pi -3.84 ± 3.80, 22% relative reduction; p = 0.331) or glaucoma medication use (PT -0.49 ± 1.17 vs. Pi -0.26 ± 0.73; p = 0.168) from baseline. However, Pi had significantly fewer individual complications (PT 20 vs. Pi 5; p < 0.0001) throughout the postoperative period. CONCLUSION: At 12 months of follow-up, both techniques significantly lowered IOP, but fewer complications were observed in the Pi group.