ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2023
Comparison of Efficacy of Combined Phacoemulsification and iStent Inject versus Combined Phacoemulsification and Hydrus Microstent.
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.
- Comparison Between Phacoemulsification-iStent Inject W and Phacoemulsification-Micropulse Transscleral Laser Therapy in Asian Eyes With Mild-Moderate Open Angle Glaucoma.Journal of glaucoma · 2025Article
- Six-Month Outcomes from a Prospective, Randomized Study of iStent infinite Versus Hydrus in Open-Angle Glaucoma: The INTEGRITY Study.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Article
- Minimally invasive glaucoma surgery: comparison of Hydrus microstent with iStentBMJ open ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of combined phacoemulsification with iStent inject (Phaco-iStent) and Hydrus microstent (Phaco-Hydrus). Methods: This was a retrospective comparative study of patients who underwent Phaco-iStent from April 2019 to August 2020 and Phaco-Hydrus from August 2019 to December 2020 at a tertiary eye centre in Singapore. Sixty-nine Phaco-iStent eyes and 49 Phaco-Hydrus eyes were included in this study. Complete surgical success was defined as freedom from second glaucoma surgery, Intraocular pressure (IOP) of 18 mmHg or less, and discontinuation of all antiglaucoma medications. Results: At 12 months, both Phaco-iStent and Phaco-Hydrus groups had comparable surgical success rate (68.1% vs 51%, Conclusion: Phaco-iStent and Phaco-Hydrus have similar surgical efficacy and safety profiles at 12 months.
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.