A comparison of iStent combined with phacoemulsification and endocyclophotocoagulation (ICE2) with the PreserFlo MicroShunt and XEN-45 implants

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS), including minimally invasive bleb surgery (MIBS), is a rapidly evolving area of research and clinical interest in ophthalmology. The growing number of devices has necessitated evaluations to identify subtle differences in outcomes between treatments. OBJECTIVES: To compare clinical effectiveness and safety outcomes of iStent combined with endoscopic cyclophotocoagulation (ICE2) with bleb forming PreserFlo MicroShunt (PMS) and XEN-45 gel implant in a 24-month retrospective review. DESIGN: A retrospective review of patient records. METHODS: We compared outcomes of 247 patients undergoing one of three glaucoma procedures (ICE2 = 162; PMS = 48; XEN-45 = 37) at a single facility in the United Kingdom. Clinical records were reviewed retrospectively between July 2016 and May 2020. Pairwise comparisons and within group analyses were performed to assess intraocular pressure (IOP), best-corrected LogMAR visual acuity (BCVA), the Humphrey visual fields and antiglaucoma medication outcomes across the three treatment groups. RESULTS: No statistically significantly differences in IOP between the groups at day 7, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months. PMS had statistically significantly change in IOP between baseline and day 7 compared with ICE2 (p = 0.003). BCVA was statistically significant different at 24 months between the ICE2 compared with PMS group (0.12 versus 0.33 LogMAR; p = 0.002). PMS group achieved the largest decline in medication usage between baseline a 24-month follow-up (2.9 versus 0.9; p < 0.001), with no statistically significant difference in the number of antiglaucoma medications being used between groups at 24 months. Postoperative complications in all three groups were transient and could be resolved with office-based interventions. CONCLUSION: Real-world outcomes after 24 months were similar between patients undergoing MIGS and MIBS procedures

The effectiveness of schemes that refine referrals between primary and secondary care - the UK experience with glaucoma referrals: the Health Innovation & Education Cluster (HIEC) Glaucoma Pathways Project

Objectives: A comparison of glaucoma referral refinement schemes (GRRS) in the UK during a time period of considerable change in national policy and guidance. Design: Retrospective multisite review. Setting: The outcomes of clinical examinations by optometrists with a specialist interest in glaucoma (OSIs) were compared with optometrists with no specialist interest in glaucoma (non-OSIs). Data from Huntingdon and Nottingham assessed non-OSI findings, while Manchester and Gloucestershire reviewed OSI findings. Participants: 1086 patients. 434 patients were from Huntingdon, 179 from Manchester, 204 from Gloucestershire and 269 from Nottingham. Results: The first-visit discharge rate (FVDR) for all time periods for OSIs was 14.1% compared with 36.1% from non-OSIs (difference 22%, CI 16.9% to 26.7%; p<0.001). The FVDR increased after the April 2009 National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) glaucoma guidelines compared with pre-NICE, which was particularly evident when pre-NICE was compared with the current practice time period (OSIs 6.2–17.2%, difference 11%, CI −24.7% to 4.3%; p=0.18, non-OSIs 29.2–43.9%, difference 14.7%, CI −27.8% to −0.30%; p=0.03). Elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) was the commonest reason for referral for OSIs and non-OSIs, 28.7% and 36.1%, respectively, of total referrals. The proportion of referrals for elevated IOP increased from 10.9% pre-NICE to 28.0% post-NICE for OSIs, and from 19% to 45.1% for non-OSIs. Conclusions: In terms of ‘demand management’, OSIs can reduce FVDR of patients reviewed in secondary care; however, in terms of ‘patient safety’ this study also shows that overemphasis on IOP as a criterion for referral is having an adverse effect on both the non-OSIs and indeed the OSIs ability to detect glaucomatous optic nerve features. It is recommended that referral letters from non-OSIs be stratified for risk, directing high-risk patients straight to secondary care, and low-risk patients to OSIs

iMIGS: An innovative AI based prediction system for selecting the best patient-specific glaucoma treatment

The use of AI-based techniques in healthcare are becoming more and more common and more disease-specific. Glaucoma is a disorder in eye that causes damage to the optic nerve which can lead to permanent blindness. It is caused by the elevated pressure inside the eye due to the obstruction to the flow of the drainage fluid (aqueous humor). Most recent treatment options involve minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) in which a stent is placed to improve drainage of aqueous humor from the eye. Each MIGS surgery has a different mechanism of action, and the relative efficacy and chance of success is dependent on multiple patient-specific factors. Hence the ophthalmologists are faced with the critical question; which method would be better for a specific patient, both in terms of glaucoma control but also taking into consideration patient quality of life? In this paper, an Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS) has been developed in the form of a Treatment Advice prediction system that will offer the clinician a suggested MIGS treatment from the baseline clinical parameters. ANFIS was used with a real-world MIGS data set which was a retrospective case series of 372 patients who underwent either of the four MIGS procedures from July 2016 till May 2020 at a single center in the UK. • Inputs used: Clinical measurements of Age, Visual Acuity, Intraocular Pressure (IOP), and Visual Field, etc. • Output Classes: iStent, iStent and Endoscopic Cyclophotocoagulation (ICE2), PreserFlo MicroShunt (PMS) and XEN-45). • Results: The proposed ANFIS system was found to be 91% accurate with high Sensitivity (80%) and Specificity (90%)

The false negative rate and the role for virtual review in a nationally evaluated glaucoma referral refinement scheme

Purpose: To establish the safety of the CHANGES glaucoma referral refinement scheme (GRRS). Methods: The CHANGES scheme risk stratifies glaucoma referrals, with low risk referrals seen by a community based specialist optometrist (OSI) while high risk referrals are referred directly to the hospital. In this study, those patients discharged by the OSI were reviewed by the consultant ophthalmologist to establish a ‘false negative’ rate (Study 1). Virtual review of optic disc photographs was carried out both by a hospital‐based specialist optometrist as well as the consultant ophthalmologist (Study 2). Results: None of these 34 discharged patients seen by the consultant were found to have glaucoma or started on treatment to lower the intra‐ocular pressure. Five of the 34 (15%) were classified as ‘glaucoma suspect’ based on the appearance of the optic disc and offered a follow‐up appointment. Virtual review by both the consultant and optometrist had a sensitivity of 80%, whilst the false positive rate for the optometrist was 3.4%, and 32% for the consultant (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The false negative rate of the OSIs in the CHANGES scheme was 15%, however there were no patients where glaucoma was missed. Virtual review in experienced hands can be as effective as clinical review by a consultant, and is a valid method to ensure glaucoma is not missed in GRRS. The CHANGES scheme, which includes virtual review, is effective at reducing referrals to the hospital whilst not compromising patient safety

The effect of changes in referral behaviour following NICE guideline publication on agreement of examination findings between professionals in an established glaucoma referral refinement pathway: The Health Innovation & Education Cluster (HIEC) Glaucoma Pathways project

Aim : To investigate whether the publication of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) glaucoma guidelines had an effect on the agreement of examination findings between professionals involved in an established glaucoma referral refinement pathway. Methods: To report inter-professional agreement for the clinical examination findings of optometrists with a special interest in glaucoma (OSI), optometrists with no specialist interest in glaucoma (non-OSI) and a glaucoma consultant. Part 1 investigated agreement between an OSI and consultant and part 2 investigated agreement of clinical findings between the non-OSI and a specialist clinician (OSI or consultant). Results: Part 1: Agreement between OSI and consultant in determining an abnormal intraocular pressure (IOP) (>21 mm Hg) expressed as a percentage positive predictive value (PPPV) was no different pre-NICE (60.6%) and post-NICE (61.4%, p=0.51) guidelines. PPPV for identification of an abnormal optic disc was better pre-NICE (60.6%) than post-NICE (42.7%, p=0.02). The appropriate referral rate for patients referred by an OSI was higher pre-NICE (69.6%) than post-NICE (61.2%) (p=0.07). Part 2: The PPPV between non-OSI and specialist clinician for an abnormal IOP was better pre-NICE (62.5%) than post-NICE (50.9%, p=0.12). This was also observed for abnormal optic discs, 70.0% pre-NICE and 52.9% post-NICE (p=0.04). Conclusions: The accuracy for detecting an abnormal IOP by the OSI has remained unchanged post-NICE, but there was a reduction in accuracy in detecting an abnormal optic disc as well as the appropriate referral rate. For the non-OSI, there was a decline in both IOP and optic disc assessment accuracy

Sustainability in Ophthalmology

Global resources are finite; as this becomes more apparent and the consequences of global warming start to affect more of the world’s population the concept of sustainability in healthcare is becoming more important. Ophthalmology is no exception and this paper has been created by a group of people from a wide variety of disciplines to inform, guide, provoke thought and offer practical solutions to some of the sustainability issues within ophthalmology. At the present time changes to practice that improve sustainability are voluntary but the NHS has ambitious targets and there may come a time when decreasing our carbon footprint is no longer optional. As a profession ophthalmology should be ready for this and lead the way with carbon reduction initiatives that also improve the standard of patient care. The College calls for leadership from the profession and the healthcare industry to develop best practice and integrate these into our service redesign. It provides suggestions to improve the sustainability of ophthalmology services e.g. mobile operating theatres (section 4), administrative efficiency. Section 5 discusses the potential benefits of Glaucoma Referral Refinement. Section 6 explores building energy improvements. Section 7 covers the importance of information technology and solutions which will in the long term save money by reducing energy costs. Procurement and industry relationships are examined in Section 8 e.g. efficient ordering of IOLs. Section 9 calls for medical schools to include sustainability in undergraduate curricula. Section 10 explores the evidence base for sustainable healthcare and section 11 provides examples of existing initiatives. This is a position paper from The Royal College of Ophthalmologists designed for Ophthalmologists, allied professions, other medical specialties and interested lay partie