ArticleInternational ophthalmology2026
Comparative outcomes of phaco-trabeculectomy versus phaco-tube implantation: a 6-year review.
Article in International ophthalmology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCombined cataract and glaucoma surgeries are common in patients diagnosed with both visually significant cataract and uncontrolled intraocular pressure (IOP). Although phacoemulsification with Ahmed glaucoma valve (phaco-AGV) implantation and phacoemulsification with trabeculectomy (phaco-trab) are established surgical options, limited data are available on their long-term comparative outcomes, particularly in large patient cohorts. METHODOLOGY: A retrospective cohort study involving 249 eyes of patients who underwent either phaco-AGV (n = 120) or phaco-trab (n = 129) procedures at a tertiary eye center was conducted. Patients were followed for up to 6 years after surgery. The primary outcome measure was surgical success, defined as an IOP between 6 and 21 mmHg with or without glaucoma medications and without further glaucoma surgery or light perception vision loss. Secondary outcomes included IOP level, number of glaucoma medications, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and postoperative complications. Surgical outcomes were analyzed using Kaplan‒Meier survival curves, and chi‒square and ANOVA tests were used to assess differences between the two groups.
resultsAt the final follow-up, the cumulative probability of surgical success was slightly greater in the phaco-trab group than in the phaco-AGV group (59.9% vs. 40.1%, P < 0.001). The mean IOP was significantly lower in both groups at the final follow-up than at baseline (p < 0.001), with comparable final IOP levels. The mean number of glaucoma medications was significantly lower in the phaco-trab group than in the phaco-AGV group (p < 0.05). Postoperative complications were more frequent in the phaco-AGV group (32.5%) than in the phaco-trab group (16.3%) (p = 0.003). Visual acuity improvements were comparable between the groups.
conclusionBoth the phaco-AGV and phaco-trab procedures effectively reduced IOP and improved visual acuity in patients with coexisting cataract and glaucoma. However, phaco-trab was associated with a lower rate of postoperative complications and required fewer long-term glaucoma medications. These findings suggest that while both procedures are viable options, phaco-trab, compared with phaco-AGV, may offer a more favorable risk‒benefit profile across an extended follow-up.
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.