ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2025
Incidence of Corneal Graft Failure with Glaucoma Drainage Device Placement in the Anterior Chamber Compared to the Ciliary Sulcus.
Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to evaluate the rate of corneal graft failure in eyes with glaucoma drainage device (GDD) placed in the anterior chamber (AC) versus the ciliary sulcus (CS).
methodsThis was a retrospective chart review of eyes with coexisting corneal transplant and GDD between January 2014 and December 2021 at an academic medical center. The primary outcome was incidence of corneal transplant failure. Groups were compared with logistic regression modeling utilizing generalized estimating equations with an unstructured correlation to account for patients with two eyes included. Adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence limits were determined for the primary outcome. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to demonstrate the time to failure.
resultsAmong 58 eyes, the graft failure rate for GDDs placed in the AC versus CS was 42.5% and 10.5%, respectively (p = 0.05). Male patients had higher odds of failure, OR 3.5 (95% CI 1.1, 10.4, p = 0.03). Maximum intraocular pressure, topical carbonic anhydrase inhibitor use, and type of corneal graft were not significantly associated with failure. The Kaplan-Meier survival curve demonstrated higher corneal transplant failure probabilities for eyes with GDD in the AC versus CS (p = 0.06). GDD location, after adjusting for sex, was not significantly associated with failure, OR 3.0 (95% CI 0.8, 11.6, p = 0.10).
conclusionsCorneal transplant failure rates were four times higher in eyes with GDDs in the AC compared to the CS, but the difference was not statistically significant. Further studies with larger sample sizes and follow-up are needed to fully explore differences in failure rates by GDD placement.
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.