Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32774286›Full record

ArticleCase reports in ophthalmology

Development of an Infrared Monitor-Guided Bleb Revision Procedure.

Kenji Matsushita, Rumi Kawashima, Kohji Nishida

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Case reports in ophthalmology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Kenji MatsushitaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Suita, Japan.
Rumi KawashimaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Suita, Japan.
Kohji NishidaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Suita, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The needle revision procedure to address failing filtering blebs is a blind technique that might easily damage the scleral flap, conjunctiva, and choroid. We propose a new surgical procedure, infrared monitor-guided bleb revision, to perform bleb revision minimally invasively and effectively, and demonstrate the procedure in a patient. We developed the guided procedure with the infrared monitor to observe the bleb interior with greater contrast. Under the monitor, we dissect the hard fibrotic tissue with a bleb knife and, if necessary, remove adhesions using a needle and vitreous forceps. Finally, 5-fluorouracil is injected into the subconjunctiva. We have performed bleb revisions safely with clear visualization of the scleral flap using an infrared light. In the current case, the patient had good intraocular pressure control for about 1 year. The new infrared monitor-guided bleb revision procedure facilitates successful bleb revisions without damage to the underlying structures.

Indexed as

5-fluorouracilBleb knifeBleb revisionInfrared lightTrabeculectomy

Identifiers

PMID32774286
PMCPMC7383186

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.