ReviewOphthalmology and therapy2023
The Treatment of Primary Angle-Closure Glaucoma with Cataract: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trails.
Review in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vision-related quality of life after phacoemulsification combined with goniosynechialysis and goniotomy in patients with primary angle-closure glaucoma and cataract.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Declining laser peripheral iridotomy for angle closure alongside rising cataract surgeries: A nationwide cohort study in South Korea.PloS one · 2026Article
- Preoperative Ocular Biometric Parameters as Predictors of Intraocular Pressure Reduction After Phacoemulsification Cataract Surgery in Non-Glaucomatous Eyes.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The Effects of Lens Extraction Surgery on Intraocular Pressure and Anterior Segment Parameters in Primary Angle-Closure Glaucoma.Turkish journal of ophthalmology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrently, there is no generally approved surgical treatment for patients with primary angle-closure glaucoma (PACG) and co-existing cataracts. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of phacoemulsification and phacotrabeculectomy in PACG patients with cataract.
methodsDiverse databases were searched, including PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Chinese Journal Full-text Database (CNKI), Wanfang database, and China Science and Technology Journal Database, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on phacoemulsification and phacotrabeculectomy for the treatment of PACG published up to 30 June 2021. ReviewManager (RevMan) version 5.4 software was used for the meta-analysis, and the effective quantity of measurement data was measured by the mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The effect of counting data was measured by odds ratio (OR).
resultsOur search of the databases identified 14 RCTs that satisfied the search criteria. Meta-analysis of these 14 RCTs showed that at the 1 month postoperative follow-up, intraocular pressure (IOP) of patients in the phacoemulsification group was higher than that of patients in the phacotrabeculectomy group (MD 2.04, 95% CI 1.42-2.65; P < 0.00001). However, the postoperative IOP was not significantly different between the two groups at the 3, 6, and 12 months postoperative follow-ups (P = 0.52, P = 0.51, and P = 0.05, respectively). More medications for IOP reduction were required by patients in the phacoemulsification group compared with those in the phacotrabeculectomy group at 3 months postoperation (MD 0.76, 95% CI 0.33-1.18; P = 0.0005), 6 months postoperation (MD 0.66, 95% CI 0.15-1.18; P = 0.01), and 12 months postoperation (MD 0.76, 95% CI 0.22-1.30; P = 0.006). Patients in the phacoemulsification group obtained better best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) than those in the phacotrabeculectomy group (MD - 0.17, 95% CI - 0.34 to - 0.01; P = 0.04) at 3 months postoperation, but there was no significant difference in BCVA between the two groups at 6 and 12 months postoperation (P = 0.33 and P = 0.56, respectively). The deepened anterior chamber was more obvious in patients in the phacoemulsification group versus those in the phacotrabeculectomy group (MD 0.61, 95% CI 0.03-1.18; P = 0.04). Patients in the phacoemulsification group experienced fewer postoperative complications than those in the phacotrabeculectomy group (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.17-0.42; P < 0.00001).
conclusionOur results provide evidence that phacotrabeculectomy has advantages over phacoemulsification for the treatment of PACG in terms of better IOP and reduced medication need during the early stage post surgery. However, in terms of the complication risk, phacoemulsification is the more secure treatment option.
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.