ArticleFrontiers in medicine2022
Ultrasound cyclo-plasty for moderate glaucoma: Eighteen-month results from a prospective study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2022. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Efficacy of Ultrasound Cycloplasty for Glaucoma Patients and Pathological Observation on the Ciliary Body in Rabbit Models.Journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Impact of ultrasound cycloplasty on ocular biomechanics and refractive parameters: a comprehensive review.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Efficacy of ultrasound cyclo-plasty in treatment of glaucoma in Asian population.International journal of ophthalmology · 2025Review
- Efficacy of ultrasound cyclo-plasty in patients with refractory glaucoma.International journal of ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Efficacy, safety and IOP-lowering mechanisms of ultrasound cycloplasty for angle-closure glaucoma.International journal of ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Efficacy and safety of ultrasound cycloplasty as the first treatment in glaucoma for eyes with functional vision: A 1-year prospective study.Advances in ophthalmology practice and researchArticle
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the long-term clinical efficacy of ultrasound cyclo-plasty (UCP) in the treatment of moderate glaucoma and molecular effects in animal experiments. Methods: An 18-month clinical study was conducted among 32 patients with moderate glaucoma. The primary outcome was surgical success, defined as a reduction in intraocular pressure (IOP) of greater than or equal to 20% from the baseline and an IOP value of greater than 5 mmHg at the last follow-up. The secondary outcomes were related to the quality of life, complications, and mean IOP value at each follow-up. In the animal experiment, 20 New Zealand rabbits were used to establish a high-IOP model and implement UCP. The distribution of aquaporin 4 (AQP4) in the ciliary body and the tissue changes under electron microscopy were observed after surgery. Results: The mean patient IOP decreased from 34.9 ± 4.9 mmHg before surgery to 23.5 ± 5.2 mmHg at 18 months after UCP. No vision loss occurred in any patient. Some patients had postoperative complications, but the symptoms were mild and disappeared within 3 months after the surgery. Most patients had good postoperative quality of life. Histology showed that AQP4 remained in the ciliary muscle after UCP, and only the bilayered epithelial cells showed coagulative necrosis. Furthermore, electron microscopic observation revealed the destruction of ciliary process cells covered by ultrasound after UCP. Conclusion: UCP is associated with mild postoperative reactions and the mild treatment of ciliary tissue and is a safe and effective method for reducing IOP in moderate glaucoma.
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.