Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-24 @ 11:54 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2025-12-25 @ 9:49 PM
Study NCT ID:
NCT05344651
Status:
RECRUITING
Last Update Posted:
2022-12-13
First Post:
2022-04-19
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
False
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Comparing the Baerveldt and Paul Glaucoma Drainage Devices and Their Effects on the Corneal Endothelium
Sponsor:
Oogziekenhuis Rotterdam
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Comparing the Baerveldt and Paul Glaucoma Drainage Devices and Their Effects on the Corneal Endothelium
Status:
RECRUITING
Status Verified Date:
2022-12
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
Rationale: The Baerveldt glaucoma drainage device (GDD) successfully reduces intraocular pressure but also involves a risk of corneal endothelial deterioration. Supposedly, the tip of a GDD tube with a thinner diameter, such as the Paul implant, will remain at a larger distance from the cornea and, thereby, cause less damage.
Objective: To determine whether the Paul tube induces less damage to the corneal endothelium than the Baerveldt GDD.
Study design: Randomized clinical trial. Study population: Phakic patients scheduled for surgical GDD implantation. Intervention: Either a Baerveldt or a Paul GDD implant. Main study parameters/endpoints: Endothelial cell density and tube position at 24 months.
Nature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit and group relatedness: The Paul GDD may have a less harmful effect on corneal endothelium. Otherwise, both GDDs will probably have a similar risk/benefit profile. The risks of study-related assessments are negligible, burden is low, extra time is about 5 x 1.5 h (total 7.5 h) in two years.
Objective: To determine whether the Paul tube induces less damage to the corneal endothelium than the Baerveldt GDD.
Study design: Randomized clinical trial. Study population: Phakic patients scheduled for surgical GDD implantation. Intervention: Either a Baerveldt or a Paul GDD implant. Main study parameters/endpoints: Endothelial cell density and tube position at 24 months.
Nature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit and group relatedness: The Paul GDD may have a less harmful effect on corneal endothelium. Otherwise, both GDDs will probably have a similar risk/benefit profile. The risks of study-related assessments are negligible, burden is low, extra time is about 5 x 1.5 h (total 7.5 h) in two years.
Detailed Description:
None
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
None
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: