ArticleInternational ophthalmology2024
Clinical outcomes of Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation in primary open-angle glaucoma and pseudoexfoliative glaucoma.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical outcomes of the PAUL glaucoma implant in primary open-angle and pseudoexfoliative glaucoma eyes after failed glaucoma surgeries.Acta ophthalmologica · 2026Article
- Effect of Sub-Tenon's Triamcinolone on Hypertensive Phase and Clinical Outcomes Following Ahmed Glaucoma Valve Implantation in Neovascular Glaucoma Patients.Journal of current glaucoma practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the clinical outcomes of Ahmed glaucoma valve (AGV) implantation in primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and pseudoexfoliative glaucoma (PEXG).
methodsThe patients who underwent AGV implantation for POAG and PEXG between January 2015 and December 2021 in a single tertiary center eye clinic were reviewed retrospectively. Thirty-one eyes with the diagnosis of POAG constituted Group 1 and 40 eyes with the diagnosis of PEXG constituted Group 2. The primary outcome measures were intraocular pressure (IOP) changes after AGV implantation and surgical success at the last visit. We evaluated complete and qualified surgical success using the following three criteria: (1) IOP ≤ 21mmH g, (2) IOP ≤ 18 mmHg, and (3) IOP ≤ 15 mmHg, as well as the absence of any serious complications, such as light perception loss and phthisis bulbi, and additional de novo glaucoma surgery.
resultsThe mean follow-up times were 25.2 (± 21.4) months and 27.6 (± 19.8) months for Groups 1 and 2, respectively (p > 0.05). In Groups 1 and 2, the mean preoperative IOPs were 31.9 ± 9.4 mmHg and 32.3 ± 8.4 mmHg, respectively, which significantly reduced to 14.5 ± 0.7 mmHg and 11.6 ± 0.6 mmHg, respectively at the last postoperative visit (p < 0.001 for both). The mean IOP value at the last visit was statistically significantly lower in Group 2 (p = 0.006). At the last visit, the number of eyes with qualified success according to criteria 1, 2, and 3 was 26 (83.9%), 25 (80.6%), and 18 (58.1%), respectively, in Group 1 and 39 (97.5%), 39 (97.5%), and 32 (80%), respectively, in Group 2. The comparison of the qualified success rates showed statistically significantly higher rates in Group 2 for criterion 2 (p = 0.038).
conclusionAGV implantation had high success rates in both POAG and PEXG, but at the final visit, lower IOP levels were reached in the latter.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38326580What 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.