OMNI®, the new surgical option in the treatment of glaucoma

• Published in: Acta ophthalmologica (Oxford, England) England), 2022-12, Vol.100 (S275), p.n/a
• Main Authors: Merino, Jacobo Yáñez, Hermosín, Mario García, Rufas, Ines Munuera, Navarro, Damian Garcia, Merino, Andres Biescas, Arenas, Blanca Ferrández, Poves, Jose Manuel Larrosa
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Cataracts; Glaucoma; Surgery
• ISSN: 1755-375X; 1755-3768
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-3768.2022.0736

Purpose: The mechanisms of elevation of intraocular pressure (IOP) in eyes with open‐angle glaucoma are complex and probably include problems related to alterations in the trabecular network, Schlemm channel and distal collecting channels. Traditional surgeries, such as trabeculectomy and the implantation of a shunt microtube, avoid these structures and divert the aqueous humour to the subconjunctival space. Recently, a growing family of minimally invasive glaucoma (MIGS) surgeries has evolved to achieve the reduction of IOP without blistering by restoring flow through the conventional physiological route of exit. One of the devices in this family is the OMNI® surgical system, which was designed to address the three sources of resistance to output flow: trabecular network, Schlemm channel and distal collectors. Thanks to this device it is possible to perform two procedures with a single surgery and overcome three points of flow resistance. The relative novelty of this device makes it important to monitor and analyse long‐term results in normal clinical practice. Methods: We present 6 clinical cases of chronic open‐angle glaucoma that were subjected to surgery with the OMNI® device, associating cataract phacoemulsification in 5 of them. Results: The reduction in IOP that we have observed at 3 and 6 months is around 30%, which is very similar to what has been published in the literature. Conclusions: In our experience, the OMNI® surgical system has provided a clinically relevant decrease in IOP and the number of active ingredients needed, with a good safety profile, although a greater volume of patients and follow‐up time are required to draw more precise conclusions.