ArticleInternational journal of surgery case reports2025
Comparative outcomes of Ahmed glaucoma valve implant and Paul glaucoma implant in managing aphakic glaucoma: A case report.
Article in International journal of surgery case reports, 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Paul Glaucoma Implant: a systematic review of safety, efficacy, and emerging applications.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionManaging intraocular pressure (IOP) in aphakic glaucoma is challenging, as it may often require glaucoma drainage devices (GDDs). While the Ahmed glaucoma valve (AGV) is widely used, the Paul glaucoma implant (PGI) is emerging as a viable alternative with potential advantages in IOP control and fewer complications. This report compares AGV and PGI outcomes in aphakic glaucoma management. CASE PRESENTATION: A 15-year-old male with congenital cataracts and aphakic glaucoma presented with uncontrolled IOP despite medical therapy. The right eye underwent AGV surgery, while the left underwent PGI surgery. Both devices controlled IOP, though the AGV required repositioning due to tube migration, whereas the PGI resulted in a transient IOP rise before stabilizing. DISCUSSION: Both the AGV and PGI effectively controlled IOP. The PGI provided more stable visual outcomes. While studies report similar IOP reductions for both devices, the PGI's design may contribute to more predictable visual stabilization. Tube migration, a complication observed with the AGV in this case, has been reported in other studies. The PGI may offer fewer complications and better long-term vision outcomes, making it a promising option for pediatric aphakic glaucoma management.
conclusionIn this pediatric aphakic glaucoma case, the PGI resulted in more stable visual outcomes compared to the AGV. While both implants were effective in IOP control, the PGI may offer better long-term stability with fewer complications. However, further studies involving larger cohorts are required to validate these findings.
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.