Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27275435›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2016

Long-term assessment of prostaglandin analogs and timolol fixed combinations vs prostaglandin analogs monotherapy.

Ai-Wei Liu, Lin-Yang Gan, Xiang Yao, Jian Zhou

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of ophthalmology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. From Eye Care to Hair Growth: Bimatoprost.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Orbital Fat Volume After Treatment with Topical Prostaglandin Agonists.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2020
    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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ai-Wei LiuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Dongfang Hospital, the Second Clinical Medical College of Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing 100078, China.
Lin-Yang GanDepartment of Ophthalmology, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China.
Xiang YaoDepartment of Ophthalmology, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China.
Jian ZhouDepartment of Ophthalmology, Dongfang Hospital, the Second Clinical Medical College of Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing 100078, China.
Beijing University of Chinese Medicine · CNPeking Union Medical College Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo draw a Meta-analysis over the comparison of the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy and safety between the commonly used fixed-combinations of prostaglandin analogs and 0.5% timolol with prostaglandin analogs (PGAs) monotherapy.

methodsAfter searching the published reports from MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, all randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the fixed combination of PGAs/timolol therapy (FCs) and PGAs monotherapy with treatment duration at least 6mo were included. The efficacy outcomes were mean diurnal IOP, percentage of participants whose IOP were lower than 18 mm Hg, incidence of visual field change, while the safety outcomes included corneal side effects, hyperemia and eye irritation. The analysis was carried out in RevMan version 5.3 software.

resultsAfter six-month medical intervention, the mean diurnal IOP of FCs was lower than PGAs (MD -1.14, 95% CI -1.82 to -0.46, P=0.001); the percentage of target IOP achieving between FCs and PGAs showed no significant difference (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.43, P=0.10). No statistically significant differences of the incidence of hyperemia (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.01, P=0.06) and eye irritation (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.51, P=0.12) between the FCs and PGAs monotherapy were detected. Only one research involved in corneal events, result of this trial revealed no difference between two intervention groups regarding corneal effects (central endothelial cell density, MD -0.20, 95% CI -0.72 to 0.32, P=0.45; central corneal thickness, MD -0.01, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.00, P=0.23). The evaluation of visual field change was not performed due to the limited duration of the trials included in this Meta-analysis.

conclusionThe long-term efficacy of the FCs overweighed the PGAs monotherapy in lowering IOP, but in the incidence of hyperemia and eye irritation syndromes, the differences are not statically significant. More RCTs with detailed and authentic data over the assessments of visual functions and morphology of optic nerve heads are hoped to be conducted.

Indexed as

bimatoprostfixed combination of prostaglandin analogs and timolollatanoprostocular hypertensionopen angle glaucomatafluprosttimolol

Identifiers

PMID27275435
PMCPMC4886894
OpenAlexW2397097025

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.