What has been your experience both intra-op and post-op with different non-valved implants (Baerveldt vs. Clearpath)?

In general, all 3 non-valved implant styles available in the US (Baerveldt, Clearpath, and Molteno) work quite similarly, and utilize similar techniques regarding ligation, tube modifications to create early flow anterior to the capsule, and postoperative course. The Molteno implants are slightly narrower than the corresponding Baerveldt and Clearpath models, allowing for an easier fit between the rectus muscles. The Clearpath is a thinner and more flexible material with more anterior fixation elements, potentially making implantation a bit easier. The stiffness of the Baerveldt can actually sometimes be helpful, as it will not fold or buckle when placing it in a tighter orbit. All 3 devices are similar in efficacy. Comparative studies have...

I can not say that there is much difference. Although it may be a personal preference, the ClearPath tubes can be somewhat easier to implant, given the flexible plate material, and suturing the plate to the sclera is also easier and perhaps safer due to the anterior eyelets. I have not found different rates of hypotony or long-term IOP control. One advantage of the Baerveldt plate design is that the ridge at the front end of the plate allows for a clear distinction when flow has commenced after the ligature releases; the bleb is then clearly present. With the ClearPath, the bleb is lower and diffuse and perhaps posterior, and it can be more difficult to know if there is a bleb after the ligature should have released (In my usage, the 7'0 Vi...