ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2024
Does Cataract Extraction Significantly Affect Intraocular Pressure of Glaucomatous/Hypertensive Eyes? Meta-Analysis of Literature.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does standalone phacoemulsification lower intraocular pressure in glaucomatous eyes? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Eye (London, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Trial
- Association of Gonioscopy Scores with Changes in Intraocular Pressure after Phacoemulsification in a Predominantly Vietnamese Population: A Retrospective Study.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Clinical outcomes of LAN microhook-assisted goniotomy combined with phacoemulsification in mid-to-late primary angle-closure glaucoma with cataract.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Observational
- Intraocular Pressure Reduction Following Phacoemulsification in Patients with Exfoliation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the effect of cataract extraction on intraocular pressure at 6, 12, and 24 months and their difference compared to the baseline in diverse glaucoma subtypes. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe carried out research in the MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and EMBASE databases, as of April 2022 for relevant papers, filtered according to established inclusion and exclusion criteria. The meta-analysis evaluated the Mean Reduction and relative Standard Error in these subpopulations at predetermined times. A total of 41 groups (2302 eyes) were included in the systematic review. Due to the significant heterogeneity, they were analysed through a Random Effects Model.
resultsWe obtained these differences from baseline: (1) Open Angle Glaucoma at 6, 12 and 24 months, respectively: -2.44 mmHg, -2.71 mmHg and -3.13 mmHg; (2) Angle Closure Glaucoma at 6, 12 and 24 months, respectively: -6.81 mmHg, -7.03 mmHg and -6.52 mmHg; (3) Pseudoexfoliation Glaucoma at 12 months: -5.30 mmHg; (4) Ocular Hypertension at 24 months: -2.27 mmHg.
conclusionsDespite a certain variability, the reduction in ocular pressure was statistically significant at 6, 12 and 24 months in both Open Angle Glaucoma and Angle Closure Glaucoma, the latter being superior. Data for Pseudoexfoliation Glaucoma and for Ocular Hypertension are available, respectively, only at 12 months and at 24 months, both being significant.
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.