Cutting Edge Glaucoma - Issue 2

56 • CUTTING EDGE - GLAUCOMA Conclusion Successful management of glaucoma is based on a number of pillars. Based on our current and, in some cases, still rudimentary knowledge and limited clinical experience, the miniaturized tech- nologies described in this review have the potential to improve glaucoma care. However, one major influence on the success of glaucoma therapy is not a device, a drug, or an intervention—it is a patient who is highly motivated to cooperate with the treatment by being well informed about the disease, preferably by his or her ophthalmologist. Because, to quote C. Everett Koop again, knowledge is the best prescription. Acknowledgements Funding. No funding or sponsorship was received for this study or the publication of this article. Authorship. All named authors meet the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) criteria for authorship for this manuscript, take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, and have given final approval for the version to be published. Prior Presentation. We benefited from and would like to express our appreciation for the splendid presentation by Jonathan S. Myers and Scott J. Fudemberg at the Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) 2017 on intraocular drug-delivery systems. Disclosures. H. Burkhard Dick, Tim Schultz, and Ronald D. Gerste have nothing to disclose. Compliance and Ethics Guidelines. This article is based on previously conducted studies and does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors. Data Availability. The datasets obtained and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reason- able request. Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ ), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. References 1. Agrawal P, Bradshaw SE. Systematic literature review of clinical and economic outcomes of microinvasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) in primary open angle glaucoma. Ophthalmol Ther. 2018;7:4973. https://doi. org/10.1007/s40123-018-0131-0 2. Anzari E. An update on implants for minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS). Ophthalmol Ther. 2017;6:233– 41. 3. Bhamra H, Tsai JW, Huang YW, YuanQ, Shah JV, Irazoqui P. A subcubicmillimeter wireless implantable intraocular pressure monitor microsystem. IEEE Trans Biomed Circuits Syst. 2017;11:1204–15. 4. Brandt JD, DuBiner HB, Benza R, Sall KN, Walker GA, Semba CP. Long-term safety and efficacy of a sustained- release bimatoprost ocular ring. Ophthalmology. 2017;124:1565–6. 5. De Gregorio A, Pedrotti E, Stevan G, Bertoncello A, Morselli S. XEN glaucoma treatment system in the management of refractory glaucomas: a short review on trial data and potential role in clinical practice. Clin Ophthalmol. 2018;12:773–82. 6. Dick HB, Schultz T. New developments in cataract surgery. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 2017;234:979–85 (article in German). 7. Flammer J, Mozaffarieh M. What is the present pathogenetic concept of glaucomatous optic neuropathy? Surv Ophthalmol. 2007;52(Suppl 2):S162–73. 8. Fingeret M, Dickerson JE Jr. The role of minimally invasive glaucoma surgery devices in the management of glaucoma. Optom Vis Sci. 2018;95:155–62. 9. Frech S, Kreft D, Guthoff RF, Doblhammer G. Pharmacoepidemiological assessment of adherence and influencing co-factors among primary openangle glaucoma patients—an observational cohort study. PLoS ONE. 2018;13(1):e0191185. https://doi. org/10.1371/journal.pone.0191185