ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2023
Outcomes of Non-Penetrating Deep Sclerectomy for Primary Congenital Glaucoma Performed by Experienced versus Trainee Surgeons: A Cohort Study.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of non-penetrating deep sclerectomy combined with mitomycin C in advanced open-angle glaucoma in Indian eyes.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2025Observational
- Outcomes of Trabeculo-Descemet's Membrane Microperforation During Combined Phacoemulsification and Deep Sclerectomy.Journal of ophthalmic & vision research · 2025Article
- Effect of Trabeculodescemetic Window Perforation in Deep Sclerectomy on Intraocular Pressure in Primary Congenital Glaucoma.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2024Article
- Prognostic Significance of Early Postoperative Choroidal Detachment in Patients with Congenital Glaucoma Operated with Nonpenetrating Deep Sclerectomy.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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the outcomes of non-penetrating deep sclerectomy (NPDS) for primary congenital glaucoma (PCG) performed by experienced vs trainee surgeons. Patients and Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted in 2022 in Saudi Arabia. Consultants (Gr-1) and trainee pediatric ophthalmologists (Gr-2) performed NPDS on pediatric patients with PCG. Success was defined as an intraocular pressure (IOP) less than 21 mmHg at 6 months after surgery. Complications, glaucoma medications, and additional procedures were also observed in the two groups. Results: Gr-1 and Gr-2 operated on 14 and 39 eyes with PCG, respectively. The absolute success rates were 90.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 73.9, 100) in Gr-1 and 96.7% (95% CI: 90.2, 100) in Gr-2 (odds Ratio=1.1; 95% CI: 0.87, 1.3; P=0.54). Survival analysis suggested that the failure rate in the first 6 months after NPDS was not significantly different between the two groups (hazard ratio=1.45; 95% CI: 0.13, 16.0; P=0.767). The complications included hypotony (2 cases), vitreous hemorrhage (1 case), and total flap penetration (1 case). Only one eye in Gr-2 needed glaucoma medication after surgery. There was no significant difference in the success rates of one surgeon before and after training (P=0.43). The age (P=0.59) and sex (P=0.77) of patients, type of surgeon (P=0.94), and preoperative IOP (P=0.59) were not significant predictors of a stable IOP at 6 months after NPDS. Conclusion: At 6 months after NPDS surgery performed by experienced and trainee pediatric ophthalmologists, the outcomes (stabilization of IOP) were similar between the two groups.
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.