Comparison of Efficacy of Micropulse and Continuous Wave Cyclophotocoagulation in Patients With Pediatric Glaucoma.

PRCIS: Both micropulse (MP-CPC) and continuous wave (CW-CPC) cyclophotocoagulation exhibited short-term effectiveness in lowering IOP, followed by reversion to near baseline levels 12 months after laser treatment. OBJECTIVE: To determine and compare the effectiveness and safety of MP-CPC and CW-CPC in patients diagnosed with pediatric glaucoma. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on a total of 28 patients (81 eyes) diagnosed with pediatric glaucoma either undergoing MP-CPC or CW-CPC. Intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements, number of glaucoma medications, and the onset of complications were collected at baseline, 1-month, 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month intervals. Success rate (SR) was defined as eyes achieving IOP ≤21 mm Hg and ≥5 mm Hg and a 20% reduction in IOP at the last follow-up visit. RESULTS: All patients either undergoing MP-CPC or CW-CPC were matched for age (mean ± SD; 1.76 ± 1.69 vs 1.56 ± 2.49 y). Patients undergoing MP-CPC had significant decreases in IOP from baseline IOP at 1, 3, and 6 months with a 22% SR at 12 months. CW-CPC had a significant decrease in IOP from baseline IOP at all follow-ups, with a 27% SR at 12 months. At the 12-month follow-up, the CW-CPC cohort exhibited a significantly larger overall drop in IOP when compared with the MP-CPC cohort, (7.99 ± 7.95 vs 1.78 ± 6.89, P < 0.05); however, the difference in SR between treatment groups (27% vs 22%) at 12 months was not significant ( P > 0.05). Complications were minimal for both groups. CONCLUSION: Both MP-CPC and CW-CPC exhibited short-term effectiveness in lowering IOP, followed by reversion to near baseline levels 12 months after laser treatment. Both MP-CPC and CW-CPC exhibited similar SR at 12 months, 22% and 27% respectively.

An update on visual prosthesis.

PURPOSE: To review the available evidence on the different retinal and visual prostheses for patients with retinitis pigmentosa and new implants for other indications including dry age-related macular degeneration. METHODS: The PubMed, GoogleScholar, ScienceDirect, and ClinicalTrials databases were the main resources used to conduct the medical literature search. An extensive search was performed to identify relevant articles concerning the worldwide advances in retinal prosthesis, clinical trials, status of devices and potential future directions up to December 2022. RESULTS: Thirteen devices were found to be current and were ordered by stimulation location. Six have active clinical trials. Four have been discontinued, including the Alpha IMS, Alpha AMS, IRIS II, and ARGUS II which had FDA and CE mark approval. Future directions will be presented in the review. CONCLUSION: This review provides an update of retinal prosthetic devices, both current and discontinued. While some devices have achieved visual perception in animals and/or humans, the main issues impeding the commercialization of these devices include: increased length of time to observe outcomes, difficulties in finding validated meaures for use in studies, unknown long-term effects, lack of funding, and a low amount of patients simultaneously diagnosed with RP lacking other comorbid conditions. The ARGUS II did get FDA and CE mark approval so it was deemed safe and also effective. However, the company became more focused on a visual cortical implant. Future efforts are headed towards more biocompatible, safe, and efficacious devices.