Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30310971›Full record

SynthesisGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2019

Efficacy of glaucoma drainage devices in uveitic glaucoma and a meta-analysis of the literature.

Wishal D Ramdas, Jan Pals, Aniki Rothova, Roger C W Wolfs

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of rho-kinase inhibitors in uveitic glaucoma and ocular hypertension secondary to uveitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Application of Silicone in Ophthalmology: A Review.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  7. XENGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2024
    Article
  8. Update on Diagnosis and Treatment of Uveitic Glaucoma.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Uveitic glaucoma in children: a systematic review on surgical outcomes.Journal of ophthalmic inflammation and infection · 2022
    Review
  13. A comparison of long-term results after Baerveldt 250 implantation in advanced uveitic vs. other forms of glaucoma.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Observational
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 1 institution in 1 country.

Wishal D RamdasDepartment of Ophthalmology, Erasmus Medical Center, 's Gravendijkwal 230, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. w.ramdas@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1780-5281
Jan PalsDepartment of Ophthalmology, Erasmus Medical Center, 's Gravendijkwal 230, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Aniki RothovaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Erasmus Medical Center, 's Gravendijkwal 230, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Roger C W WolfsDepartment of Ophthalmology, Erasmus Medical Center, 's Gravendijkwal 230, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Erasmus MC · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess the efficacy of glaucoma drainage devices (GDD) in uveitic glaucoma and non-uveitic glaucoma, and to perform a meta-analysis of previously published results to compare with our data.

methodsRetrospective case-control study, in which all eyes that underwent GDD surgery were included from 2015 onwards. Cases were defined as patients with uveitic glaucoma. Patients with non-uveitic glaucoma served as controls. To compare our results, a review of the literature was performed using PubMed database.

resultsA total of 99 eyes were included (38 with uveitic glaucoma). The preoperative IOP was 25.9 ± 7.7 mmHg and 27.9 ± 9.6 mmHg for patients with and without uveitis (p = 0.277). No significant differences were found between patients with and without uveitis in the final IOP or reduction in IOP (44.9% vs. 42.8%, respectively). Within the first year after surgery, 13.2% of cases developed macular edema (vs. 6.6%; p = 0.267) and 15.8% a transient hypotony (vs. 8.2%; p = 0.242). A meta-analysis of 24 studies showed a postoperative weighted mean difference of - 17.8 mmHg and 2.2 lower number of IOP-lowering medications in uveitic glaucoma (compared to - 13.2 mmHg and 3.5 in the current study, respectively).

conclusionGDD surgery in patients with uveitis has a similar effect on IOP as in patients without uveitis. The risks of developing macular edema and hypotony were slightly higher in patients with uveitis, but the results were not statistically significant. These findings are in line with previous reports, though data on the efficacy of GDD surgery and macular edema in uveitic glaucoma is scarce.

Indexed as

GlaucomaGlaucoma Drainage ImplantsHumansIntraocular PressureUveitisAhmedBaerveldtGlaucomaGlaucoma drainage deviceIntraocular pressureUveitis

Identifiers

PMID30310971
PMCPMC6323086
OpenAlexW2896616333

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.