 So yeah, my name is Dan. I'm just gonna be talking about a poster that I'm submitting for the upcoming ASCRS conference. I'm gonna be talking about using the G6, microplots, transglaryl, psychophotocoyagulation as the primary procedural intervention in patients with open ankle glaucoma. So I was a research assistant for Dr. Michael Deolvingo at Cook County Hospital. He's a glaucoma specialist and the project that he had me working on was looking at transglaryl, psychophotocoyagulation or TCP, both the newer G6 MP laser and the older traditional continuous diode laser and using that in patients with glaucoma. So I did a bunch of like chart review, data entry and then about a few weeks ago, I rotated with a glaucoma specialist at a private practice and I asked him what his management's algorithm was procedural wise for patients with open ankle glaucoma and he told me his primary treatment option or first line treatment option was the SLT selective laser tuberculoplasty and then secondary option, second line option was surgical tuberculectomy or in certain cases tube or shunt insertions. And so I asked him where ciliary body destruction management was in his algorithm. He said that third line for refractive cases and I told him that at Cook, I noticed that they started using the G6 as the primary management in open-angle glaucoma patients and he seemed quite surprised and taken aback by that. So that kind of gave me the idea to do a poster presentation looking at the efficacy of using the G6 as primary initial procedural intervention. So this is a retrospective series of 36 eyes representing 31 primary open-angle glaucoma patients without any prior history of laser or surgical interventions. Managed medically but with elevated IOPs treated initially with the G6. And this was at Cook County Hospital from 2015 to 2017. So initially I looked at data for every patient who received the G6 and then patients with a glaucoma diagnosis other than POAG like SOAG or NVG were excluded. Patients with any other previous history of a procedural or surgical intervention were excluded. And then I looked at an initial and post G6 IOPs. Patients who needed multiple G6 procedures or who subsequently required a secondary procedural intervention other than a G6 were also noted. So for results, the average follow-up was about 6.3 months. The, with a number of 36, the average IOP pretreatment was 25.33 and the range in that was 15 to 45. The average IOP post-off one month, number of 33 was 17.82 and that represented a 24.7% change from baseline. At post-off three months with a number of 15, the average IOP was 16 and that represented a 33% change from baseline. Post-off six months with a number of 16, the pressure was 20.88 and that represented a change in baseline of 8.1%. I just wanted to talk about that briefly. I noticed that it was right around this time that about the six month mark, a little bit past the six month mark, that most patients who needed, who either required a second G6 procedure or a secondary laser or surgical procedure required their procedure. And so there was a few patients whose intraocular pressures actually went up higher than their baseline and so this is kind, this variance is reflected in that 8.1%. That's why that looks kind of lower. Post-off nine months, number of eight, 13.13, 41.8% change from baseline and finally a post-off month 12, a number of five. 13.4 was the pressure change of 34.9% from baseline. So I found that six of the 36Is or 16.7% required a second G6 procedure. One of the six required a third G6 procedure. Six of 36Is required some kind of secondary laser or surgical intervention as well. And then for patients who needed a second G6 procedure, there was six of those once again. The average IOP initially was 24.33 and then the average IOP post-off one month was 15 and that represented a 41.1% change. So just in conclusion, the G6 MPTCPs and effective primary treatment option for medically refractive or medically difficult to manage POAG patients in an urban hospital setting. So the urban hospital setting, there was definitely issues of compliance. I found that noted in a lot of the charts, a lot of patients has issues either coming into clinic for appointments or using their eye drops regularly or running up eye drops and not asking for refills. The procedure is repeatable as we kind of saw in the data. And probably what I think is a key advantage to the G6 is the relative ease of it. Since it's a transcular approach, obviously, it's relatively a lot easier to do than SLT and obviously over surgery as well. And so it should be considered as a viable initial procedural intervention for patients with POAG. Thank you.