SynthesisEye (London, England)2026
Paul tube implant: a meta-analysis and systematic review evaluating clinical outcomes.
Synthesis in Eye (London, England), 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveA systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the peer-reviewed literature describing the efficacy of the Paul glaucoma implant (PGI) in managing intraocular pressure (IOP) and its outcomes.
methodsComprehensive searches were conducted across major databases to identify relevant studies. The analysis focused on glaucoma patients who underwent PGI. The primary outcomes included failure rate, success rates (complete and qualified), reduction in IOP and post-operative complications. Reduction in medication use was assessed as secondary outcome. A random-effects model was applied for the meta-analysis, and pooled estimates were calculated using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software.
resultsOut of the 255 articles screened, six studies met the eligibility criteria with a total sample of 267 eyes. In glaucoma patients receiving the PGI, complete (56.4%) and qualified success rates were 56.4 and 80.3% respectively. The mean reduction in IOP was 13.62 mmHg, demonstrating a significant difference vs baseline (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, there was a significant reduction in medications by 2.80 (p < 0.0001).The average rate of hypotony (all definitions) was 5.12%.
conclusionThis meta-analysis provides evidence supporting the efficacy of PGI in controlling intraocular pressure and achieving good outcomes for glaucoma patients.
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.