ArticleBioelectronic medicine2022
Electrical neurostimulation in glaucoma with progressive vision loss.
Article in Bioelectronic medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Low intensity transcranial electric stimulation: Safety, ethical, legal regulatory and application guidelines (2017-2025: An update) - endorsed by the European Society for Brain Stimulation (ESBS) and by the International Federation for Clinical Neurophysiology (IFCN).Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Review
- Article
- Virtual reality stimulation for neuroprotection and neuroenhancement of vision in optic neuropathy patients: a prospective clinical trial.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Retinal Phosphenes Induced by Transorbital Electrical Stimulation: Influence of Light Adaptation, Electrode Montage, and View Direction.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Mechanisms contributing to inhibition of retinal ganglion cell death by cell permeable peptain-1 under glaucomatous stress.Cell death discovery · 2024Article
- New Devices in Glaucoma.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe retrospective study provides real-world evidence for long-term clinical efficacy of electrical optic nerve stimulation (ONS) in glaucoma with progressive vision loss.
methodsSeventy glaucoma patients (45 to 86 y) with progressive vision loss despite therapeutic reduction of intraocular pressure (IOP) underwent electrical ONS. Closed eyes were separately stimulated by bipolar rectangular pulses with stimulus intensities up to 1.2 mA sufficient to provoke phosphenes. Ten daily stimulation sessions within 2 weeks lasted about 80 min each. Right before ONS at baseline (PRE), vision loss was documented by static threshold perimetry and compared to the same assessment approximately 1 year afterwards (POST). Mean defect (MD) was defined as primary outcome parameter. Perimetries with a reliability factor (RF) of max. 20% were considered.
resultsPerimetry follow-up of 101 eyes in 70 patients fulfilled the criterion of a max. 20% RF. Follow-up was performed on average 362.2 days after ONS. MD significantly decreased from PRE 14.0 dB (median) to POST 13.4 dB (p < 0.01). 64 eyes in 49 patients showed constant or reduced MD as compared to baseline (PRE 13.4 dB vs. POST 11.2 dB). In 37 eyes of 30 patients, MD increased from PRE 14.9 dB to POST 15.6 dB.
conclusionsInnovative treatments that preserve visual function through mechanisms other than lowering IOP are required for glaucoma with progressive vision loss. The present long-term data document progression halt in more than 63% of affected eyes after ONS and, thus, extend existing evidence from clinical trials.
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.