throbber
34
`
`Poster Abstracts - Surgery
`
`American (Hammad Sorters 39th natural .lIrlert'r'rn,r
`
`In A Novel Technique for his Internet
`Waheculectomytnescrlptienanrocedut-earttl
`Preliminary Results
`
`ri-rontas SHUTE', Westley Green,
`James Lie. Arshern Situational
`" Washington University in St. Louis
`
`School of Medicine
`
`Furposefltalc-tranee
`iiiaumttta is the leading cause at irreversible blindness
`worldwide, affecting more than 64 milliott people. Lowering
`intraneular pressure ilGl’i remains the only was to mitigate
`the risk of glauch-tnatnus vision loss. .‘i'ledications1 LASERs.
`and incisinnal surge-t3.r aitn to lower hill“ it}: decreasing aqueous
`humor {Al-Ii pnteiucritttt ttr facilitating, its outflow.
`Thu: maitsr site of resista rice tn All rtuti‘ln‘w is thought [II
`he the ittxtacanalictllar traltecttlar naeshwurit [TML' Multiple
`trcattnent modalities steel-t tn lnwer EDP it" hypassing this tissue
`or attempting to ternut'e it altogether. These procedures {then
`require expensive implants Ilr specialized surgical ittstrutttents.
`The authors dct'eluped a technique itJr ah intertlts ttahLTttit-ctunly
`utilizing a disposable Ej'gtlllgt" hypodermic needle [or the
`treatment of open angle glaucoma. ‘l‘he sttrgieal lmreedure—
`termed heat ah irtretnu needle gonlectontt' illnNCiJ-rctnd
`preliminary results are presented here.
`
`Methods
`
`The stud}- complied with the Declaration uf Helsinki and was
`apprm-ed hr the Washingtmt Unieersity in St. Ltmis institutional
`review heard. A retrospective chart review was perforMed for all
`patients who underwent HANG ht-
`I 0F 3 :ltIIlmts at Washington
`University in St. Louis between July It] I? attd June it) its. All
`patients prtwided written consent prior to surgery. I’m-operative
`assessment included gonioseops performed by 1 old authors to
`confirm identifiable landmarks—specifically TM—and absence
`of stgnifieant nasal peripheral anterior st'nechiac. Faclt patient
`nndem'enr E-iumpl‘ttc}r 1visual field testing and retinal nerve iihcr
`layer iRNl-l] analysis using optical coherence tttmttgta phy. The
`purcmlnn: was performed alum: or in umtltiriatinn with cata tact
`surgery itt adults with ”pen angle glaucttrna.
`Tissue samples were preserved in 4% parat-tn'n'taldehtrtleiI
`phosphate htlit'erled saline hefnrt: being processed fur histology
`and etnl'iedded in pa ra flirt. Seminns were cut and stained with
`Itetnutuxt-lin-eusin and periodic acid-iichiit.
`The mean and stattdard desiatiun pre-and ptrst~operatit-e
`101’ and number of glaucoma medications were calculated. The
`student [mired t‘ test was used to oompare pre- and post-operative
`data. rI't. i" 1raltte of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
`Surgical Procedure: The operative eye was prepped and
`draped in the usual sterile npl'I-th alrnic Fashion. a wire eyelid
`speculum was pieced. fit
`I mm pa racentcsis was created
`cithcr infctinrlt' rtr auric'riotltr1 and t'iscnelastic was used to Fill
`the anterinr chamber. ll perforated itt cnmsett with cataract
`su tger}; rhc tentptiral incision was used to gain access to the
`nasal angle. If performed as a standalone pritt-oedtltc1 :3 L4 n'ttn
`paracentesis was created temporally. The patient's head and
`
`operating Jt'tirtruscupt: were rotated to aid visualixatimt oi the
`angle structures. .Il. gttniuptisnl was. usud tu 1.‘ie'w the angle. A
`gentiotome was fashioned ht- bending the distal 1 mm oia sterile
`25~e,auge itti inch hypodermic needle toward the het'el using
`a needle driver. The heat needle was used to excise the nasal
`lflil degrees ul'l‘M. 'T'he excised portion of TM was sent For
`histologie analysis. The viscoeiastic was removed using either an
`irrigation-aspiration system or evacuated through a paraccntesis
`using balanced salt solution [355i on a cannula. l‘acl'l won nd was
`verified watertight. and the surgenn‘s preFerence nF antibiotic
`plus steroid was administered.
`If cttlnhincd with cataract surgery. tram; was perittrrnctl
`belttrc standard phactwntulsilicatinn and intrattculat lens
`implantation. Pttst-opcmtirc ca FL' and ittllttrwanp thJEL‘L'dDLl
`as with standard phacttetnulsilicatittn with intrattcttlar lens
`implantation.
`
`Results
`
`Twenty—seven eyes ni 2| patients underwent the litl. NH
`prrtced Ltrc either alum,- [twtt eye-s3 ttr ctnnhincd with
`phacttemuls'tlicatinn Elli eyes]. All patients were classified
`as ripen angle glaucoma via gttnitmttpy with stages ranging
`than mild to severe. Average pre-nperatitre mean de't'iatittn utt
`Humphrey- t-isual field testing was -T.] s: 3.1 dB. and pattern
`standard dek'latiuu was 4.2 t 2.7. Average preoperative HNI-‘L
`thickness measured lw 0LT was TEL? : l1 interim-s. Mean
`Shatter grade on gontnscopt' was 1.2 : l.3. Average ntattinttttn
`IOI’ [Tm-asl was 25.6 t 5.3: mm Hg. while mean oentral corneal
`thickness tCCT] was 550.3 : 313 microns. Mean treatment
`spanned Hilde = iii degrees of the nasal TM. Thirteen of the 21
`paticnts were female.
`Average pre—ttperatitre Iii—:11JI was 137.3 a 4.3 nirnl IS on LE
`2 1.5 topical glaucoma medications. r'tt pttst-ttperaritre nmnth
`[fills-ill tint:1 mean l'Dl' was ”.6 =14 mlnl it: if“ = fi.[l.‘ill tJl'J
`[Hi 2 LI topical glauctnna medications IF = {Lil l .1. Fit POM.
`three, mean lill’ was 14.5 : 2h rnnti’lg H" = il'Cl‘H on 1159 2
`{L39 topical glarremna medications {i’ = 0.005]. in Film sire.
`mean IOI' was is z 2.5]11fll1'lgil’2 H.031 mt LB 1 1.2. topical
`glaucoma medications IP = 0.58:.
`
`Discussion
`
`The threshold for so rgical treatment triglaucttma has been
`lowered with the adrent til Itticntirtt'asit't: glauctnna surgery
`[MlGS-J. These pren'cdures offer low risk, relatively sta t'td'artli'red+
`and highly reproducible techniques lot lowering inlraoeular
`pressure Withuul the financial harden. hazards, and compliance
`pitfalls of medications. Many at these prearedures can be
`combined with cataract surgery without increasing the risk
`alto-re standard phaeaetnttlsit‘ieatian.2 Still. the cost of MILES
`devices makes these procedures inauessihle to a large nutn her of
`patients and surgeons around the world.
`The £5:th is a asst-effective alternative to many 'T'M-hased
`glaucoma procedures. It utilires a standard hypodermic needle
`modified by the surgeon in the Fashion of a reverse csstutolnc
`to completely excise-.1 scgtncnt of TM. The hct'ei and lumen of
`the hypodermic needle cumhinc rt: htrm two cutting edges—in
`effect creating a “douhlt: blade" grtnitrtontc ca paltle of excising
`tissue en him: The dorsal portion tnc the hem ncctllc acts as a
`guard. presenting incision of the posterior wall of Schicmnt's
`canal and helping maintain the plant.- ttl excision. The width tti
`the needle's “thrLthh: hlade" is titralilitlLu-sintplzr place the head
`nearer the proximal end of the lat-rel for a wider cutting surface.
`
`Petitioner - New World Medical
`
`Ex. 1020, p. 1 of2
`
`Petitioner - New World Medical
`Ex. 1020, p. 1 of 2
`
`

`

`dirtt'rirtrri Glanctwra Society 39:}: d mural .‘ilrt'tt'rig
`
`Pastor Abatrlcts - Surgery
`
`35
`
`Similar lint-Cerium: using .1 specialized l'.IlailI.I have been iil'imrit tt}
`decrease 101‘ 26.2% over 11 Mtn'lll'lfi.'l W'l'iih: hanger follow-up
`is needed, the 101’ havering effect (if the BANG appears
`comparable at six months.
`The practice pattern at the study institution is that of a
`glaucoma relcrral center. meaning that stable patients are
`returned to their referring providers upon achievement of goal
`101’. This explains the diminishing. number of patients in the data
`collection pool orcr tintc. it also aocounts for the concentration
`over time of more refractory cases requiring topical medications
`to achieve grail IOP.
`iixistingTM-hasul MICE implants; and surgical instruments
`can he earpcmtivc. Many practices, esfitinllf in the developing
`world, do rtttt have the ahility ttt tifientl l'ttlnd I'L‘dii tnr US dollars
`an a single-Lise instnn'nent with mildntn—mufierate 101’ lowering
`ellect. Many financially Sta l'lll.‘ practice: would welcome the
`opportunity to lower a glauctmta patiettt‘s medication harden via
`a met-eflemiire, low risk. arid implant-[rec MIGS puree-dare. Ft
`recent Interact aearelt showed that a lilU-muut box of 2.51auge
`Sifl inelt itetdlescosts approximately I I US dollars. Additionally,
`most operating venues already have 25~gauge hypodermic
`needles at their disposal. making this proeodure readily available
`to the angle surgeon. in an era when 1'1.le deriees can he made
`unavailable to the population at a moment's notice. haying
`severai viable options For safe IOI’ lowering is paramount.
`
`Conclusion
`
`The HANG I'Jl'll'L'ljtll't.‘ repreiientr. an accessible THUG}; ttptinn,
`1with preliminary trulrtnncts similar to thus: of much more
`expensive alternatives. While the earl y results are promising, a
`prospective study is underway to further chantcteri-a: the long-
`term outcomes oi this novel technique.
`
`2.
`
`Intervention
`I. Grant WM. (ilirtical measurements of aqueous oulFlnw. rill-LII. their
`Oplrtfiraimuf 195 Irlfllltl ] 3—13 l.
`fialnuelson TW. Kat: L_l. Wellst'i-L et al. Randontitod evaluation
`Ill the Iralwcular Inicm-llypars stem With phatwlhulsilicatiml
`in patients. withelanmma and cataract. Unirtlmlmoiogy.
`ZDI l :ll3[33:4$9-61
`llnrairai 5K. Seihold [.K, Radciiffe NM. ct al. lI-Month Outcomes
`ul Ulrniututny Performed Usirn; the Kahmk Hual Blade Ctrmhint'tl
`with Cataract Singer}- in lit-ca with Medically Treated {Elanmmm
`illrl'tr 'Hm'. 21.113 SepLi.5l5'i:146Ll-I4Ei9.
`
`.3.
`
`Petitioner - New World Medical
`
`Ex. 1020, p. 2 of2
`
`Petitioner - New World Medical
`Ex. 1020, p. 2 of 2
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket