Efficacy and safety of sustained-release intraocular drug therapy for glaucoma: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Main Article Content

Rizki Oktabiriya
Sahilah Ermawati
Rizqi Aji Prasetyo

Abstract

BACKGROUND
Glaucoma is a leading cause of irreversible blindness worldwide. Although intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction remains the cornerstone of treatment, limitations of long-term topical therapy, including poor adherence and ocular surface complications, have increased interest in sustained-release intraocular drug delivery systems. This systematic review evaluated the efficacy and safety of sustained-release intraocular implants in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension.


METHODS
A systematic search of PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCT) published between January 2021 and September 2025. Double-blind RCT were selected according to PRISMA guidelines and appraised using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist. Data were synthesized narratively. Four RCTs met the eligibility criteria and were included. The studies evaluated travoprost and bimatoprost intracameral implants with follow-up durations of 12-36 months.


RESULTS
All studies demonstrated significant IOP reduction and non-inferiority to timolol. Least-squares mean diurnal IOP reduction ranged from −5.4 to −8.5 mmHg with travoprost implants and −6.2 to −7.8 mmHg with bimatoprost implant. The proportion of patients remaining free from adjunctive topical therapy ranged from 63% to 81%. Adverse events were generally mild and transient. However, travoprost implants showed no clinically significant corneal endothelial cell loss (CECL), whereas bimatoprost implant resulted in CECL ≥ 20% in 8.1% (10 µg) and 24.4% (15 µg) of patients, leading to restriction of single administration per eye.


CONCLUSION
Sustained-release intraocular implants provide effective and durable IOP reduction while potentially improving treatment adherence. However, implant selection should consider ocular anatomy and corneal endothelial safety.

Article Details

Section

Review Article

How to Cite

Efficacy and safety of sustained-release intraocular drug therapy for glaucoma: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. (2026). Universa Medicina, 45(3). https://doi.org/10.18051/UnivMed.2026.v45.%p

References

1. Sarfo JO, Mordi P, Aggrey EK, Quaicoe ASP, Attafuah PYA. Glaucoma prevalence and treatment in sub-Saharan Africa’s elderly population : a scoping review. BMC Geriatr 2025;25:255. doi:10.1186/s12877-025-05901-0.

2. Hsu E, Desai M. Glaucoma and systemic disease. Life 2023;13:1018. doi:10.3390/life13041018.

3. Vision Loss Expert Group of the Global Burden of Disease Study; GBD 2019 Blindness and Vision Impairment Collaborators. Global estimates on the number of people blind or visually impaired by glaucoma : a meta-analysis from 2000 to 2020. Eye 2024;38: 2036-46.. doi:10.1038/s41433-024-02995-5.

4. Naik V, Ohri S, Fernandez E, Mwanza J-C, Fleischman D. Changes in individuals’ glaucoma progression velocity after IOP-lowering therapy : a systematic review. PLoS One 2025;20:1–11. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0324806.

5. Cvenkel B, Kolko M. Implants to treat glaucoma : promising or not ? Drugs Aging 2026;43:153–62. doi:10.1007/s40266-025-01271-9.

6. Kahook MY, Rapuano CJ, Messmer EM, Radcliffe NM, Galor A, Baudouin C. The ocular surface preservatives and ocular surface disease : a review. Ocul Surf 2024;34:213–24. doi:10.1016/j.jtos.2024.08.001.

7. Zhou X, Zhang X, Zhou D, Zhao Y, Duan X. A narrative review of ocular surface disease related to anti-glaucomatous medications. Ophthalmol Ther 2022;11:1681–704. doi:10.1007/s40123-022-00557-0.

8. Kesav NP, Young CEC, Ertel MK, Seibold LK, Kahook MY. Sustained-release drug delivery systems for the treatment of glaucoma. Int J Ophthalmol 2021;14:148–59. doi:10.18240/ijo.2021.01.21.

9. Kemer OE, Mekala P, Dave B, Kooner KS. Managing ocular surface disease in glaucoma treatment : a systematic review. Bioengineering 2024;11:1–24. doi:10.3390/bioengineering11101010.

10. Goldstein MH, Silva FQ, Blender N, Tran T, Vantipalli S. Ocular benzalkonium chloride exposure : problems and solutions. Eye 2022;36:361–8. doi:10.1038/s41433-021-01668-x.

11. Gale MJ, Kinast RM, Sanchez FG, Mansberger SL. Adherence with glaucoma medications : barriers to success and prospects for improvement. Curr Ophthalmol Rep 2021;9:184–9. doi:10.1007/s40135-021-00273-1.

12. Al-qaysi ZK, Beadham IG, Schwikkard SL, et al. Sustained release ocular drug delivery systems for glaucoma therapy. Adv Ther 2023;41:867–81. doi:10.1007/s12325-024-02789-7.

13. Zaharia A-C, Dumitrescu OM, Radu M, Rogoz R. Adherence to therapy in glaucoma treatment - a review. J Pers Med 2022;12:1–11. doi:10.3390/jpm12040514.

14. Belamkar A, Harris A, Zukerman R, et al. Sustained release glaucoma therapies : novel modalities for overcoming key treatment barriers associated with topical medications. Ann Med 2022;54:343–58. doi:10.1080/07853890.2021.1955146.

15. Quaranta L, Novella A, Tettamanti M, Pasina L, Weinreb RN, Nobili A. Adherence and persistence to medical therapy in glaucoma : an overview. Ophthalmol Ther 2023;12:2227–40. doi:10.1007/s40123-023-00730-z.

16. Craven ER, Walters T, Christie WC, et al. 24-month phase I / II clinical trial of bimatoprost sustained ‑ release implant (bimatoprost SR ) in glaucoma patients. Drugs 2020;80:167–79. doi:10.1007/s40265-019-01248-0.

17. Lee SS, Almazan A, Decker S, et al. Intraocular pressure effects and mechanism of action of topical versus sustained-release bimatoprost. Clin Ophthalmol 2019;8:15–23. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S156421.

18. Bacharach J, Tatham A, Ferguson G, et al. Phase 3, randomized, 20-month study of the efficacy and safety of bimatoprost implant in patients with open angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension (ARTEMIS 2). Drugs 2021;81:2017–33. doi:10.1007/s40265-021-01624-9.

19. Sarkisian SR, Ang RE, Lee AM, et al. Travoprost intracameral implant for open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension: 12-month results of a randomized, double masked trial. Ophthalmol Ther 2024;13:995–1014. doi:10.1007/s40123-024-00898-y.

20. Singh IP, Reiss GR, Flowers BE, et al. Administration of the travoprost intracameral implant in an office ‑ based surgery setting. Ophthalmol Ther 2025;14:3109–18. doi:10.1007/s40123-025-01254-4.

21. Singh IP, Berdahl JP, Sarkisian SR Jr, et al. Long term safety and efficacy evaluation of travoprost intracameral implant based on pooled analyses from two phase III trials. Drugs 2024;84:1299–311. doi:10.1007/s40265-024-02074-9.

22. Berdahl JP, Sarkisian SR, Ang RE, et al. Efficacy and safety of the travoprost intraocular implant in reducing topical IOP-lowering medication burden in patients with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Drugs 2024;84:83–97. doi:10.1007/s40265-023-01973-7.

23. Sarkisian SR, Ang RE, Lee AM, et al. Phase 3 randomized clinical trial of the safety and efficacy of travoprost intraocular implant in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Ophthalmology 2024;131:1021–32. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2024.02.022.

24. Hassan FE, Azhari R, Adenita Q, Syarfina A, Ananda A. Minimally invasive glaucoma surgical techniques for open-angle glaucoma: a systematic review. J Adv Res Med Heal Sci 2023;9:77–84. doi:10.61841/w7v03m86.

25. Grzybowski A, Och M, Kanclerz P, De Moraes CG. Primary open angle glaucoma and vascular risk factors : a review of population based studies from 1990 to 2019. J Clin Med 2020;9:761. doi:10.3390/jcm9030761.

26. Jóhannesson G, Stille U, Botling A, et al. Guidelines for the management of open-angle glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol 2024;102:135–50. doi:10.1111/aos.16599.

27. Lee SS, Robinson MR, Weinreb RN. Episcleral venous pressure and the ocular hypotensive effects of topical and intracameral prostaglandin analogs. J Glaucoma 2019;28:846–57. doi:10.1097/IJG.0000000000001307.

28. Holló G. Ocular hyperemia associated with topical glaucoma medication: understanding and differentiating clinical appearance and underlying mechanisms. Expert Opin Drug Saf 2025;24:145–56. doi:10.1080/14740338.2024.2436062.

29. Gade S, So Y, Mishra D, et al. Ocular drug delivery : emerging approaches and advances. Pharmaceutics 2025;17:1–28. doi:10.3390/pharmaceutics17050599.

30. Ahmed S, Amin MM, Sayed S. Ocular drug delivery : a comprehensive review. AAPS Pharm Sci Tech 2023;24: 66. doi:10.1208/s12249-023-02516-9.

31. Torkashvand A, Izadian A, Hajrasouliha A. Advances in ophthalmic therapeutic delivery: a comprehensive overview of present and future directions. Surv Ophthalmol 2025;69:967–83. doi:10.1016/j.survophthal.2024.07.002.

32. Lewis RA, Christie WC, Day DG, et al. Bimatoprost sustained release implants for glaucoma therapy: 6-month results from a phase I/II clinical trial. Am J Ophthalmol 2017;177:137–47. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2016.11.020.

33. Kompella UB, Hartman RR, Patil MA. Extraocular, periocular, and intraocular routes for sustained drug delivery for glaucoma. Pharmaceutics 2021;13:1–76. doi:10.3390/pharmaceutics13070867.

34. Teymoorian S, Craven ER, Nguyen L, Werts E. Real world study of the effectiveness and safety of intracameral bimatoprost implant in a clinical setting in the united states. Clin Ophthalmol 2024;18:187–99. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S445005.

35. Medeiros FA, Sheybani A, Shah MM, et al. Single administration of intracameral bimatoprost implant 10 µg in patients with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Ophthalmol Ther 2022;11:1517–37. doi:10.1007/s40123-022-00527-6.

36. Weinreb RN, Bacharach J, Brubaker JW, et al. Bimatoprost implant biodegradation in the phase 3, randomized, 20 month ARTEMIS studies. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 2023;39:55–62. doi:10.1089/jop.2022.0137.

37. Vagiakis I, Papadopoulou EP, Amaxilati E, Konstas AG, Panos GD. Bimatoprost intracameral implant (Durysta ®): a new era in glaucoma management through sustained release innovation. Drug Des Devel Ther 2025;19:703–14. doi:10.2147/DDDT.S506520.

38. Sarkisian SR Jr, Ho Q, Jiao J, et al. Phase 3, randomized, comparison study of intracameral bimatoprost implant 10 µg and selective laser trabeculoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol 2025;272:19–37. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2024.12.026.

39. Shirley M. Bimatoprost implant : first approval. Drugs Aging 2020;37:457–62. doi:10.1007/s40266-020-00769-8.

40. Shi KSY, Abubaker Y, Lang M V, et al. Overview of intracameral drug delivery systems in glaucoma. Clin Ophthalmol 2026;20:1–11. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S568183.

41. Feizi S. Corneal endothelial cell dysfunction : etiologies and management. Ther Adv Ophthalmol 2018;10:1–19. doi:10.1177/2515841418815802.

42. Siska S, Wiratnaya IGE, Bakta IM, et al. The role of mesenchymal stem cells for corneal endothelial regeneration : a systematic review. Rambam Maimonides Med J 2024;15:1–11. doi:10.5041/RMMJ.10531..

43. Huston J, Paauw M, Orey D, et al. Travoprost intracameral implant : a review on the novel treatment modality for open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Ann Pharmacother 2024;1–6. doi:10.1177/10600280241291911.

44. Elhusseiny AM, Aref AA. Sustained release therapies with the prostaglandin analogues intracameral implants. Ophthalmol Ther 2024;13:1833–9. doi:10.1007/s40123-024-00965-4.

45. Tan SS, Wong TT. Drug delivery systems in glaucoma – current innovations and future perspectives. Asia-Pacific J Ophthalmol 2025;14:100163. doi:10.1016/j.apjo.2025.100163.

46. Peng J, Huang W, Duan J. Efficacy and safety of prostaglandin drugs for elevated intraocular pressure : a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Front Med (Lausanne) 2025; 12:1642986. doi:10.3389/fmed.2025.1642986.

47. Vaiciuliene R, Rylskyte N, Baguzyte G, Jasinskas V. Risk factors for fluctuations in corneal endothelial cell density. Exp Ther Med 2022;23:129. doi:10.3892/etm.2021.11052.

48. Li Z, Duan H, Zhou Q. Research progress of corneal endothelial cell regeneration and replacement. Eye ENT Res 2024;1:2–10. doi:10.1002/eer3.2.

49. Berdahl JP, Lehmann RP, Jones JJ, Sarkisian SR. Safety and feasibility of the exchange procedure for the travoprost intracameral implant for open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Ophthalmol Ther 2026;15:1485–98. doi:10.1007/s40123-026-01355-8.

50. Durand ML. Bacterial and fungal endophthalmitis. Clin Microbiol Rev 2017;30:597–613. doi:10.1128/CMR.00113-16.