Medium-term clinical outcomes following Xen45 device implantation

  • Aitor Fernández-García
  • Ying Zhou
  • Mercedes García-Alonso
  • Henry D. Andrango
  • Francisco Poyales
  • Nuria GarzónEmail author
Original Paper



To evaluate medium-term clinical outcomes with microstent XEN® 45 Gel Stent (Allergan Dublin, Ireland) for treatment of primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG).

Material and methods

This is a retrospective, descriptive and observational study involving 93 eyes from 63 patients who had undergone POAG surgery with a XEN® 45 Gel Stent implantation and had been followed up and controlled between 12 and 36 months.


IOP dropped from 18.23 ± 5.00 mmHg pre-op to 14.16 ± 2.14, 14.47 ± 2.16 and 14.63 ± 1.91 at 1, 2 and 3 years after surgery (p = 0.000, 0.000 and 0.001) consecutively. Mean number of medications dropped from 1.87 ± 0.94 preoperatively to 0.31 ± 0.69, 0.34 ± 0.63 and 1.00 ± 0.88 (p = 0.000, 0.000 and 0.017) at 12, 24 and 36 months. Mean visual field deviation values never turned out to be significant for any of the follow-up visit data. A total of 94.6% of the surgical procedures turned out to be complication-free. In one surgery, the procedure failed and 18 months later other device was implanted.


POAG surgical procedures with XEN® 45 Gel Stent implants are a safe and effective treatment approach.


Glaucoma MIGS Xen45 



This study was supported by Allergan via an independent and unrestricted research grant. Neither honoraria nor payments were made for authorship. It should be noted that Allergan S.A. was not involved in the development of the study.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Saheb H, Ahmed II (2012) Micro-invasive glaucoma surgery: current perspectives and future directions. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 23(2):96–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Agrawal P, Bradshaw SE (2018) Systematic literature review of clinical and economic outcomes of micro-invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) in primary open-angle glaucoma. Ophthalmol Ther 7(1):49–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brandao LM, Grieshaber MC (2013) Update on minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) and new implants. J Ophthalmol. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vinod K, Gedde SJ (2017) Clinical investigation of new glaucoma procedures. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 28(2):187–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Smith M et al (2019) 1-year outcomes of the Xen45 glaucoma implant. Eye (Lond) 33(5):761–766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sheybani A et al (2015) Phacoemulsification combined with a new ab interno gel stent to treat open-angle glaucoma: pilot study. J Cataract Refract Surg 41(9):1905–1909CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lewis RA (2014) Ab interno approach to the subconjunctival space using a collagen glaucoma stent. J Cataract Refract Surg 40(8):1301–1306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Loewen NA, Schuman JS (2013) There has to be a better way: evolution of internal filtration glaucoma surgeries. Br J Ophthalmol 97(10):1228–1229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mansouri K et al (2018) Prospective evaluation of XEN Gel implant in eyes with pseudoexfoliative glaucoma. J Glaucoma 27(10):869–873PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    De Gregorio A et al (2018) Minimally invasive combined glaucoma and cataract surgery: clinical results of the smallest ab interno gel stent. Int Ophthalmol 38(3):1129–1134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lenzhofer M et al (2019) Four-year results of a minimally invasive transscleral glaucoma gel stent implantation in a prospective multi-centre study. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 47(5):581–587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Karimi A et al (2018) Efficacy and safety of the ab-interno Xen gel stent after failed trabeculectomy. J Glaucoma 27(10):864–868PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fernandez-Garcia A, Romero C, Garzon N (2015) "Dry Lake" technique for the treatment of hypertrophic bleb following Xen® Gel Stent placement. Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol 90(11):536–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IOA MadridMadridSpain
  2. 2.Optometry and Vision Department, Faculty of Optics and OptometryComplutense University of MadridMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations