Pediatric GlaucomaPhase 4NCT01494974
Comparison of the Ahmed Glaucoma Valve FP7 and FP8 in Pediatric Glaucoma
A Phase 4 study testing FP7 Ahmed Glaucoma Drainage Implant and FP8 Glaucoma Drainage Implant in people with Pediatric Glaucoma, run by Federal University of São Paulo at 1 site in Brazil.
Trial summary
The purpose of this study is to compare the success rates and complications of two models of Ahmed glaucoma implants (FP7 and FP8) in patients with pediatric glaucoma. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages Up to 10 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Pediatric Glaucoma
- What is being tested?
- FP7 Ahmed Glaucoma Drainage Implant and FP8 Glaucoma Drainage Implant
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 40 participants
- Where
- 1 siteBrazil
- Study dates
- Dec 2011to Dec 2015
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Up to 10 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child
Who may be able to join
- Diagnostic of Pediatric Glaucoma with indication of Ahmed Glaucoma Valve implantation
- Age from 0 to 10 years old
Who cannot join
- Children older then 10 years old
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Brazil1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Federal University of São Paulo - Ophthalmology Department
São Paulo, São Paulo, 04023-062
Camila F Netto, MD, +55-11-99177717, milanetto@gmail.com
Camila F Netto, MD
About this study
Official title: Comparison of the Ahmed Glaucoma Valve FP7 and FP8 in Pediatric Glaucoma: a Randomized Clinical Trial.
The purpose of this study is to compare the success rates and complications of two models of Ahmed glaucoma implants (FP7 and FP8) in patients with pediatric glaucoma.
Read the detailed description
INTRODUCTION
The drainage implants have become an important alternative in the treatment of pediatric glaucoma refractory to angular and filtration surgery or medical therapy (1). Such implants drain the aqueous humor from the anterior chamber of the eye to a plate positioned above the sclera, between the rectus muscles. The aqueous humor goes through the pseudocyst that forms around the plate by passive diffusion and is drained by the venous capillaries and lymphatic system.
The Ahmed drainage implant (New World Medical, Inc., Rancho Cucamonga, CA, USA) is a device with flow restrictors, which decreases the incidence of postoperative complications such as hypotony (2-3). It is made of silicone and comes in two sizes. The FP7 model has a surface of 184 mm2, 13mm wide and 16mm long. The FP8 model presents 96mm2 surface, 9.6 mm wide and 10mm long.
Studies in animals and adult humans suggest that the surface area of the implant plate is directly related to the amount of aqueous fluid drained through the same (4-7). In contrast, a very large implant can result in the extrusion of the same, uncontrolled intraocular pressure, corneal injury by endothelial touch, patient discomfort and ocular motility problems. The use of pediatric size implants in small eyes can avoid such complications. A high rate (34.8%) of anterior plate of the tubes in children under 2 years of age has been reported (8-9). On the other hand, the use of pediatric implante may affect the control of intraocular pressure (IOP) due to reduced drainage area (10), especially in eyes with increasing axial diameter, a result of increased eye pressure that happens in children with glaucoma. However, there is no study in the literature comparing different sizes of drainage implants in pediatric patients.
A study to compare the success rates and complications between FP7 and FP8 models is essential in order to standardize a conduct in choosing the type of implant. Currently, the choice of the drainage implant model to be used in every child lies on the free choice and personal preference of the surgeon. There is no standard procedure, based on scientific evidence for this choice.
OBJECTIVES
Compare the success rates and complications of two models of Ahmed drainage implant (FP7 and FP8) in patients with pediatric glaucoma.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This clinical trial is a prospective, randomized, masked to the evaluator to be held at the Department of Ophthalmology, Federal University of Sao Paulo.
Will be included children between 0 and 10 years of age with glaucoma and surgical indication for glaucoma drainage implant. Surgical indication for implantation of Ahmed drainage occurs in some situations: 1) children with primary congenital glaucoma that undergone angular surgery (goniotomy and / or trabeculotomy) who did not respond satisfactorily to surgery, 2) children with glaucoma secondary to aphakia who have the primary indication for implantation of Ahmed drainage, 3) children with glaucoma secondary to other eye disorders where medical treatment is not satisfactory.
A term of consent will be obtained from parents or legal guardians of the child, in which all the risks inherent to the surgical procedure will be clarified. Such risks are proper to antiglaucomatous surgery are:
- Early: hypotony, hyphema, tube endothelial touch, choroidal detachment, leakage of aqueous, vitreous hemorrhage, retinal detachment, loss of light perception
- late: uncontrolled intraocular pressure, persistent hypotony, scleral patch resorption, extrusion of the tube, retinal detachment, loss of light perception (11-18).
Considering that the selected patient has already the surgical indication for Ahmed drainage implant, the inclusion of this child in the study does not bring additional risks or discomforts to the same.
The model of the drainage implant will be chosen through allocation from a computer-generated random table.
Children enrolled in the study will be divided into two groups (one group will receive the model FP7 and another group will receive the model FP8) with the number of 20 participants in each group, totaling 40 children.
The surgeries will be performed by experienced surgeons from Glaucoma Sector from Department of Ophthalmology, Federal University of Sao Paulo.
The plate of the Ahmed drainage implant will be placed in one of the quadrants selected from the extraocular muscles between 8 and 10 mm away from the corneal limbus. The tube will have its distal portion inserted 2-3mm into the anterior chamber of the eye in the iris plane. The exposed portion of the tube is covered with donor sclera.
The children included in the study will be examined before surgery, which will be measured your visual acuity, biomicroscopy, IOP, Retinography and axial length of the eye. Immediately after surgery, with a compass we will measure the distance between the plate of drainage implant and corneal limbus.
Children will be examined again after 6 months and 1 year of surgery. We will perform the measurement of visual acuity, biomicroscopy, IOP, Retinography, axial length and measurement of the distance from the plate of the implant and corneal limbus. Post-operative examinations will be performed under narcosis, in hospitals (when it is impossible to take measures in an outpatient setting due to lack of cooperation of the child), by a doctor from congenital glaucoma sector who were not involved in the surgical procedure. The examination under narcosis involves risk to the child, which include cough, nausea, vomiting, laryngospasm, bronchospasm, apnea, bradycardia, tachycardia, hypertension, anxiety (19-21).
Two types of outcome will be considered in this study. The primary endpoint is to evaluate the position of the drainage implant plate and if the plate is positioned at a distance ≥ 8 mm from the corneal limbus after 1 year of surgery, considered successful. If the dish drain implant is positioned at a distance <8 mm from the corneal limbus, we have a failure.
As a secondary outcome, we evaluate the variation in IOP preoperative and postoperative. We will use as a criterion of success an IOP ≤ 21 mm Hg and> 5 mmHg and a 30% reduction of preoperative IOP. If the patient meets these criteria, without the use of eyedrop, classified as complete success. If the use of eyedrop is necessary to meet the criteria, a qualified success will be defined.
For failure criterion is assumed: IOP ≤ 5 mmHg or > 21 mm Hg, even with the use of eye drops, need for further surgery, and / or loss of light perception.
- Conditions
- Pediatric Glaucoma
- Being tested
- FP7 Ahmed Glaucoma Drainage Implant, FP8 Glaucoma Drainage Implant
- Keywords
- Glaucoma, Pediatric, Ahmed, Congenital, FP7, FP8
- Medical subject headings
- Hydrophthalmos, Glaucoma
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
FP7 Ahmed Glaucoma Drainage ImplantDevice
Ahmed Glaucoma Valve model FP7
FP8 Glaucoma Drainage ImplantDevice
Ahmed Glaucoma Valve model FP8
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| FP7 implant | Active comparator | Not described Receives: Device: FP7 Ahmed Glaucoma Drainage Implant |
| FP8 implant | Active comparator | Not described Receives: Device: FP8 Glaucoma Drainage Implant |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Position of the drainage implant plate
The primary endpoint is to evaluate the position of the drainage implant plate and if the plate is positioned at a distance ≥ 8 mm from the corneal limbus after 1 year of surgery, considered successful. If the plate is positioned at a distance <8 mm from the corneal limbus, we have a failure.
Measured: After 1 year of surgery
Secondary outcomes (1)
As a secondary outcome, we evaluate the variation in IOP preoperative and postoperative.
We will use as a criterion of success an IOP ≤ 21 mm Hg and> 5 mmHg and a 30% reduction of preoperative IOP. If the patient meets these criteria, without the use of eyedrop, classified as complete success. If the use of eyedrop is necessary to meet the criteria, a qualified success will be defined.
For failure criterion is assumed: IOP ≤ 5 mmHg or > 21 mm Hg, even with the use of eye drops, need for further surgery, and / or loss of light perception.
Measured: After 1 year of surgery
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted19 Dec 2011 (estimated)
- Study startDec 2011
- Primary completionDec 2015 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Pediatric GlaucomaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Federal University of São Paulo
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Camila Fonseca Netto, Federal University of São Paulo
- Investigators
- Camila F Netto, MD, Principal investigator, Assistant Doctor at Ophthalmology Department
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01494974
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CEP 0236/11
- Status last verified
- Apr 2014
- First submitted
- 15 Dec 2011
- Last updated
- 8 Apr 2014
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 8 Apr 2014. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparison of the Ahmed Glaucoma Valve FP7 and FP8 in Pediatric Glaucoma: a Randomized Clinical Trial.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01494974
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CEP 0236/11
- Conditions
- Pediatric Glaucoma
- Keywords
- Glaucoma, Pediatric, Ahmed, Congenital, FP7, FP8
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Federal University of São PauloUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Dec 2011
- Primary completion
- Dec 2015 (estimated)
- First posted
- 19 Dec 2011 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of this study is to compare the success rates and complications of two models of Ahmed glaucoma implants (FP7 and FP8) in patients with pediatric glaucoma.
Detailed description
INTRODUCTION
The drainage implants have become an important alternative in the treatment of pediatric glaucoma refractory to angular and filtration surgery or medical therapy (1). Such implants drain the aqueous humor from the anterior chamber of the eye to a plate positioned above the sclera, between the rectus muscles. The aqueous humor goes through the pseudocyst that forms around the plate by passive diffusion and is drained by the venous capillaries and lymphatic system.
The Ahmed drainage implant (New World Medical, Inc., Rancho Cucamonga, CA, USA) is a device with flow restrictors, which decreases the incidence of postoperative complications such as hypotony (2-3). It is made of silicone and comes in two sizes. The FP7 model has a surface of 184 mm2, 13mm wide and 16mm long. The FP8 model presents 96mm2 surface, 9.6 mm wide and 10mm long.
Studies in animals and adult humans suggest that the surface area of the implant plate is directly related to the amount of aqueous fluid drained through the same (4-7). In contrast, a very large implant can result in the extrusion of the same, uncontrolled intraocular pressure, corneal injury by endothelial touch, patient discomfort and ocular motility problems. The use of pediatric size implants in small eyes can avoid such complications. A high rate (34.8%) of anterior plate of the tubes in children under 2 years of age has been reported (8-9). On the other hand, the use of pediatric implante may affect the control of intraocular pressure (IOP) due to reduced drainage area (10), especially in eyes with increasing axial diameter, a result of increased eye pressure that happens in children with glaucoma. However, there is no study in the literature comparing different sizes of drainage implants in pediatric patients.
A study to compare the success rates and complications between FP7 and FP8 models is essential in order to standardize a conduct in choosing the type of implant. Currently, the choice of the drainage implant model to be used in every child lies on the free choice and personal preference of the surgeon. There is no standard procedure, based on scientific evidence for this choice.
OBJECTIVES
Compare the success rates and complications of two models of Ahmed drainage implant (FP7 and FP8) in patients with pediatric glaucoma.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This clinical trial is a prospective, randomized, masked to the evaluator to be held at the Department of Ophthalmology, Federal University of Sao Paulo.
Will be included children between 0 and 10 years of age with glaucoma and surgical indication for glaucoma drainage implant. Surgical indication for implantation of Ahmed drainage occurs in some situations: 1) children with primary congenital glaucoma that undergone angular surgery (goniotomy and / or trabeculotomy) who did not respond satisfactorily to surgery, 2) children with glaucoma secondary to aphakia who have the primary indication for implantation of Ahmed drainage, 3) children with glaucoma secondary to other eye disorders where medical treatment is not satisfactory.
A term of consent will be obtained from parents or legal guardians of the child, in which all the risks inherent to the surgical procedure will be clarified. Such risks are proper to antiglaucomatous surgery are:
- Early: hypotony, hyphema, tube endothelial touch, choroidal detachment, leakage of aqueous, vitreous hemorrhage, retinal detachment, loss of light perception
- late: uncontrolled intraocular pressure, persistent hypotony, scleral patch resorption, extrusion of the tube, retinal detachment, loss of light perception (11-18).
Considering that the selected patient has already the surgical indication for Ahmed drainage implant, the inclusion of this child in the study does not bring additional risks or discomforts to the same.
The model of the drainage implant will be chosen through allocation from a computer-generated random table.
Children enrolled in the study will be divided into two groups (one group will receive the model FP7 and another group will receive the model FP8) with the number of 20 participants in each group, totaling 40 children.
The surgeries will be performed by experienced surgeons from Glaucoma Sector from Department of Ophthalmology, Federal University of Sao Paulo.
The plate of the Ahmed drainage implant will be placed in one of the quadrants selected from the extraocular muscles between 8 and 10 mm away from the corneal limbus. The tube will have its distal portion inserted 2-3mm into the anterior chamber of the eye in the iris plane. The exposed portion of the tube is covered with donor sclera.
The children included in the study will be examined before surgery, which will be measured your visual acuity, biomicroscopy, IOP, Retinography and axial length of the eye. Immediately after surgery, with a compass we will measure the distance between the plate of drainage implant and corneal limbus.
Children will be examined again after 6 months and 1 year of surgery. We will perform the measurement of visual acuity, biomicroscopy, IOP, Retinography, axial length and measurement of the distance from the plate of the implant and corneal limbus. Post-operative examinations will be performed under narcosis, in hospitals (when it is impossible to take measures in an outpatient setting due to lack of cooperation of the child), by a doctor from congenital glaucoma sector who were not involved in the surgical procedure. The examination under narcosis involves risk to the child, which include cough, nausea, vomiting, laryngospasm, bronchospasm, apnea, bradycardia, tachycardia, hypertension, anxiety (19-21).
Two types of outcome will be considered in this study. The primary endpoint is to evaluate the position of the drainage implant plate and if the plate is positioned at a distance ≥ 8 mm from the corneal limbus after 1 year of surgery, considered successful. If the dish drain implant is positioned at a distance <8 mm from the corneal limbus, we have a failure.
As a secondary outcome, we evaluate the variation in IOP preoperative and postoperative. We will use as a criterion of success an IOP ≤ 21 mm Hg and> 5 mmHg and a 30% reduction of preoperative IOP. If the patient meets these criteria, without the use of eyedrop, classified as complete success. If the use of eyedrop is necessary to meet the criteria, a qualified success will be defined.
For failure criterion is assumed: IOP ≤ 5 mmHg or > 21 mm Hg, even with the use of eye drops, need for further surgery, and / or loss of light perception.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| FP7 implant | Active comparator | Device: FP7 Ahmed Glaucoma Drainage Implant |
| FP8 implant | Active comparator | Device: FP8 Glaucoma Drainage Implant |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- Up to 10 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Diagnostic of Pediatric Glaucoma with indication of Ahmed Glaucoma Valve implantation
- Age from 0 to 10 years old
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Children older then 10 years old
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| FP7 Ahmed Glaucoma Drainage ImplantAhmed Glaucoma Valve model FP7 | Device | FP7 implant |
| FP8 Glaucoma Drainage ImplantAhmed Glaucoma Valve model FP8 | Device | FP8 implant |
Primary outcome
Position of the drainage implant plate
Time frame: After 1 year of surgery
The primary endpoint is to evaluate the position of the drainage implant plate and if the plate is positioned at a distance ≥ 8 mm from the corneal limbus after 1 year of surgery, considered successful. If the plate is positioned at a distance <8 mm from the corneal limbus, we have a failure.
1 secondary outcome
As a secondary outcome, we evaluate the variation in IOP preoperative and postoperative.
Time frame: After 1 year of surgery
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 8 Apr 2014.
Related trials for Pediatric Glaucoma
RecruitingObservational study
Optimize Pediatric OCT Imaging
Retinal Disease, Glaucoma
Recruiting
Advancing Pediatric Retinal Imaging With Auto-aligned OCT
Eye Diseases, Retinal Disease
Active, not recruitingObservational study
Glaucoma Following Pediatric Cataract Surgery
Glaucoma Following Pediatric Cataract Surgery, Glaucoma Secondary
Recruiting
Incidence of Glaucoma-related Adverse Events in Pediatric Secondary Intraocular Lens Implantation
Lens Implantation, Intraocular
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Camila F Netto, MD principal investigator
Assistant Doctor at Ophthalmology Department
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 4 study testing FP7 Ahmed Glaucoma Drainage Implant and FP8 Glaucoma Drainage Implant in people with Pediatric Glaucoma, run by Federal University of São Paulo at 1 site in Brazil.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 8 Apr 2014. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Brazil. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 4 studies take place after a treatment is approved, to learn more about its long-term benefits and risks in everyday use.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Camila F Netto, MD (+55-1199177717, milanetto@gmail.com), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Position of the drainage implant plate (time frame: After 1 year of surgery). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 8 Apr 2014.