ArticlePloS one2018
The impact of conjunctival flap method and drainage cannula diameter on bleb survival in the rabbit model.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Updates on the Diagnosis and Management of Glaucoma.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2022Review
- Wound Healing Response After Bleb-Forming Glaucoma Surgery With a SIBS Microshunt in Rabbits.Translational vision science & technology · 2022Article
- Modulating Ocular Scarring in Glaucoma Filtration Surgery Using the Epigenetic Adjunct Suberoylanilide Hydroxamic Acid.Journal of current glaucoma practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo examine the effect of cannula diameter and conjunctival flap method on bleb survival in rabbits undergoing cannula-based glaucoma filtration surgery (GFS).
methodsTwelve New Zealand White rabbits underwent GFS in both eyes. The twenty-four eyes were divided into four groups. Two of the four groups (N = 12) received limbus-based conjunctival flaps (LBCF), and the other two (N = 12) received fornix-based conjunctival flaps (FBCF). Six FBCF rabbit eyes were implanted with 22-gauge drainage tubes, and the other six were implanted with 26-gauge tubes. Likewise, six LBCF rabbits received 22-gauge drainage tubes and six received 26-gauge tubes. Filtration blebs were evaluated every three days by a masked observer. Bleb failure was defined as the primary endpoint in this study and was recorded after two consecutive flat bleb evaluations.
resultsGroup 1 (LBCF, 22- gauge cannula) had a mean bleb survival time (Mean ± SD) of 18.7 ± 2.9 days. Group 2 (LBCF, 26-gauge cannula) also had a mean bleb survival time of 18.7 ± 2.9 days. Group 3 (FBCF, 22-gauge cannula) had a mean bleb survival time of 19.2 ± 3.8 days. Group 4 (FBCF, 26-gauge cannula) had a mean bleb survival time of 19.7 ± 4.1 days. A 2-way analysis of variance showed that neither surgical approach nor cannula gauge made a statistically significant difference in bleb survival time (P = 0.634 and P = 0.874). Additionally, there was no significant interaction between cannula gauge and conjunctival flap approach (P = 0.874), suggesting that there was not a combination of drainage gauge and conjunctival flap method that produced superior bleb survival.
conclusionLimbus and fornix-based conjunctival flaps are equally effective in promoting bleb survival using both 22 and 26-gauge cannulas in the rabbit model. The 26-gauge drainage tube may be preferred because its smaller size facilitates the implantation process, reducing the risk of corneal contact.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.