Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40136150›Full record

SynthesisEinstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2025

Phacoviscocanalostomy versus phacotrabeculectomy to treat glaucoma associated with cataracts: a meta-analysis.

Dillan Cunha Amaral, Mário Luiz Ribeiro Monteiro, Denisse J Mora-Paez, Ana Luiza Machado Ribeiro Pimentel, Matheus Mizerani Fernandes de Almeida, Jacqueline L Chen, Raíza Jacometti, Milton Ruiz Alves, Jaime Guedes, Ricardo Noguera Louzada

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic ReviewComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Dillan Cunha AmaralFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-7948-154X
Mário Luiz Ribeiro MonteiroDivisão de Oftalmologia e Laboratório de Investigação em Oftalmologia (LIM-33), Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SR Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7281-2791
Denisse J Mora-PaezGlaucoma Research Center, Wills Eye Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-2540-3240
Ana Luiza Machado Ribeiro PimentelFaculdade de Medicina, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Goiás, Goiânia, GO, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1122-6657
Matheus Mizerani Fernandes de AlmeidaFaculdade de Medicina, Centro Universitário de Valença, Valença, RJ, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-6981-3811
Jacqueline L ChenSidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2464-6338
Raíza JacomettiDivisão de Oftalmologia e Laboratório de Investigação em Oftalmologia (LIM-33), Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SR Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-4524-8661
Milton Ruiz AlvesDivisão de Oftalmologia e Laboratório de Investigação em Oftalmologia (LIM-33), Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SR Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6759-5289
Jaime GuedesGlaucoma Research Center, Wills Eye Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8174-8082
Ricardo Noguera LouzadaDivisão de Oftalmologia e Laboratório de Investigação em Oftalmologia (LIM-33), Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SR Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9610-5768

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the effectiveness and safety of phacoviscocanalostomy and phacotrabeculectomy in treating combined glaucoma and cataracts.

methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. The PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched for randomized controlled trials or observational studies comparing phacotrabeculectomy to phacoviscocanalostomy in patients with glaucoma and cataracts. Statistical analysis was used to compare the efficacy (intraocular pressure reduction, mean deviation of the visual field, and failure rates) and safety (general complication rate and rates of hyphema, hypotony, perforation, and intraocular pressure spikes) between the two procedures.

resultsThe study included 331 eyes from one randomized controlled trial and two non-randomized controlled trials, with 154 undergoing phacoviscocanalostomy and 177 undergoing phacotrabeculectomy. The results indicated no significant differences in surgical failure rates, mean deviation of the visual field, and intraocular pressure at one, three, six, and twelve months between the phacoviscocanalostomy and phacotrabeculectomy groups. Furthermore, although the overall complication rate between the two procedures showed no difference, the rate of intraocular pressure spikes was higher in patients who underwent phacoviscocanalostomy.

conclusionPhacotrabeculectomy and phacoviscocanalostomy are effective treatments for glaucoma and cataracts.Prospero database registration: (www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero) under ID CRD42024502391.

Indexed as

CataractGlaucomaPhacoemulsificationTrabeculectomyHumansIntraocular PressureRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID40136150
PMCPMC12002850

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.