Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22805056›Full record

ArticleBMC ophthalmology2012

Evaluation of filtering blebs using the 'Wuerzburg bleb classification score' compared to clinical findings.

Sandra Furrer, Marcel N Menke, Jens Funk, Marc Töteberg-Harms

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. [Modern filtration surgery. An update].Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft · 2013
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sandra FurrerUniversity of Zurich Medical Faculty, Zurich, Switzerland.
Marcel N Menke
Jens Funk
Marc Töteberg-Harms

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo determine the agreement between intraocular pressure and the 'Wuerzburg bleb classification score', as well as between single items of the score and intraocular pressure. Interobserver variability was analyzed.

methods57 post-trabeculectomy eyes were included. Colour photographs were used to score the filtering bleb in accordance to the Wuerzburg bleb classification score by two different examiners. At the same visit, clinical data such as intraocular pressure, best corrected visual acuity, slit lamp biomicroscopy and medical history were obtained by another examiner.

resultsAfter trabeculectomy, 42 out of 57 eyes (73.7%) reached the target pressure (≤ 21mmHg, and intraocular pressure reduction of at least 20%, without antiglaucoma medication, and without any additional intervention). Fair agreement was found between intraocular pressure and Wuerzburg bleb classification score ≥ 8 points and ≥ 7 points (kappa 0.24 and 0.27, respectively). Analyzing the subgroups of the morphological criteria, best agreement was found between occurrence of microcysts and target intraocular pressure (к 0.22-0.34).

conclusionsEvaluating filtering blebs after trabeculectomy by using the Wuerzburg bleb classification score is a good technique for predicting intraocular pressure control in eyes attaining a minimum score of seven points. The presence of microcysts on the filtering bleb predicts that the eye is likely to attain target pressure.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBlisterConjunctival DiseasesFemaleFiltering SurgeryGlaucomaHumansIntraocular PressureMaleMiddle AgedObserver VariationProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsTrabeculectomy

Identifiers

PMID22805056
PMCPMC3439283

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.