ABSTRACT

Purpose: Interest in micro-invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) has exploded over the last 8 years with an increase in MIGS procedures of at least 400% in the United States, according to Medicare data. MIGS is an umbrella term that can cover many different types of surgeries. This review focuses on peer-reviewed evidence for Trabectome^®, iStent inject^®, Kahook Dual Blade^®, XEN^® Gel Stent, and Hydrus^®. Methods: We present key recent studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of MIGS in various types of glaucoma patients with different stages of disease. Conclusion: We conclude that MIGS is generally safe and efficacious, although only some MIGS have been studied through randomized clinical trials. When comparing and contrasting the different MIGS procedures, large prospective studies are not yet the norm. High-quality large prospective studies involving MIGS will be an important next step as ophthalmologists decide how to incorporate MIGS into their surgical armamentarium.

摘要

目的：根据医疗保险数据，在过去 8 年中，随着美国的 MIGS 手术增加了至少 400%，对微创青光眼手术 (MIGS) 的兴趣呈爆炸式增长。MIGS 是一个总称，可以涵盖许多不同类型的手术。这次审查的重点为Trabectome同行评议的证据^®，iStent注入^®，Kahook双刃^®，XEN ^®凝胶支架和水蛇^®. 方法：我们介绍了评估 MIGS 在不同疾病阶段的各种类型青光眼患者中的有效性和安全性的近期研究。结论：我们得出的结论是 MIGS 总体上是安全有效的，尽管只有一些 MIGS 已经通过随机临床试验进行了研究。在比较和对比不同的 MIGS 程序时，大型前瞻性研究还不是常态。随着眼科医生决定如何将 MIGS 纳入他们的手术设备，涉及 MIGS 的高质量大型前瞻性研究将是重要的下一步。