ArticleIndian journal of ophthalmology2019
Clinical outcome of a nonvalved Aurolab aqueous drainage implant in posterior segment versus anterior chamber.
Article in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Retinal detachment in eyes treated with Aurolab aqueous drainage implant for refractory glaucoma - Incidence and outcomes.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Pars plana Aurolab aqueous drainage implantation for refractory glaucoma: Outcome of a new modified technique.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Aurolab aqueous drainage implant in the vitreous cavity: Our modifications over the conventional technique of glaucoma implant surgery.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Surgical outcomes of the Aurolab aqueous drainage implant (AADI) versus the Ahmed glaucoma valve for refractory paediatric glaucoma in Middle Eastern children.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Commentary: Aurolab aqueous drainage implant: Posterior versus anterior segment implantation.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2019Article
- Commentary: Clinical outcome of a nonvalved Aurolab aqueous drainage implant in posterior segment versus anterior chamber.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the outcome of a nonvalved Aurolab aqueous drainage implant (AADI) in the management of refractory glaucoma. Methods: Retrospective case series of patients with refractory glaucoma underwent AADI implantation in posterior segment (PS group) or anterior chamber (AC group) with minimum follow-up of 1 year. Primary outcome criterion was success, defined as intraocular pressure (IOP) <18 or >6 mm Hg or IOP reduced to <20% from baseline, for two consecutive visits after 3 months. Failure was defined as inability to meet IOP criteria, any additional glaucoma surgery, loss of light perception, and implant explantation. Secondary outcome criteria compared groups based on mean IOP, mean glaucoma medication use, best-corrected visual acuity, and complications at each postoperative visit. Results: In the AC and PS group of 64 patients, 32 tubes each were placed. Preoperative mean IOP was 37.41 ± 8.6 and 43.38 ± 10.3 mm Hg in AC and PS, respectively. Postoperatively IOP reduced to 14.22 ± 4.9 and 15.21 ± 8.1 mm Hg in AC and PS groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Preoperative mean antiglaucoma medication changed from 2.56 ± 0.9 and 3.44 ± 0.5 to 1.03 ± 0.9 and 1.67 ± 0.5 in AC and PS, respectively, postoperatively (P < 0.001). No significant change in VA was noted in either group. At 12 months, success rate was 84% in AC group and 72% in PS group, with PS group having 2.63 times higher hazard (risk) of failure than AC group. Conclusion: AADI implantation in PS or AC is a safe and effective method for IOP control in refractory glaucoma with its low cost being of significance in developing countries.
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.