ArticleScientific reports2023
A comparative study of ultrasound cycloplasty and endoscopic cyclophotocoagulation in the treatment of secondary glaucoma.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Efficacy of ultrasound cyclo-plasty in treatment of glaucoma in Asian population.International journal of ophthalmology · 2025Review
- From tumor microenvironment to ocular hypertension: unraveling the pathogenesis and therapeutic strategies of cancer-related glaucoma.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Efficacy, safety and IOP-lowering mechanisms of ultrasound cycloplasty for angle-closure glaucoma.International journal of ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Current trends and advancements in utilizing endoscopic cyclophotocoagulation for the Treatment of Glaucoma.Lasers in medical science · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
To compare the clinical efficacy of ultrasound cycloplasty (UCP) and endoscopic cyclophotocoagulation (ECP) in the treatment of secondary glaucoma. In a 12-month prospective single-center study, 22 patients with secondary glaucoma were treated by high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), and 23 patients with secondary glaucoma were treated by a semiconductor laser. At the final follow-up, the two groups' surgical outcomes were compared. A complete success was defined as an intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction of at least 20% from baseline and an IOP of > 5 mmHg and ≦ 21 mmHg, while a qualified success was defined as an IOP reduction of at least 20% from baseline and an IOP of > 5 mmHg. The secondary outcome was the average IOP, number of drugs, and complications at each follow-up compared with the baseline. The average preoperative IOPs in the UCP and ECP groups were 36.4 ± 9.5 mmHg (n = 2.3 drops, n = 0.2 tablets) and 34.5 ± 11.7 mmHg (n = 2.0 drops, n = 0.3 tablets), respectively. In the last follow-up, the success rate of UCP was 54% (with a decrease of 32%) and that of ECP was 65% (with a decrease of 35%), and the P-value between the two groups was > 0.05. However, there was a difference in the average IOP between these two groups 1 day and 1 week after the operation, and the IOP reduction efficiency in the ECP group was better. However, the amount of drug used after these two surgeries was significantly reduced. There were fewer postoperative complications in the UCP group (18 cases) than in the ECP group (35 cases). Both UCP and ECP can effectively reduce IOP in secondary glaucoma, and ECP has a better effect at the early stages. However, UCP has higher safety and tolerance for patients.
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.