ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2026
Treatment approaches for large traumatic cyclodialysis clefts in phakic eyes: A systematic review and proposal for standardized reporting.
Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 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
purposeCyclodialysis cleft (CDC) is an uncommon but potentially vision-threatening condition characterized by separation of the ciliary body from the scleral spur, often causing hypotony and maculopathy. While small clefts may resolve with conservative or minor treatment, large traumatic CDCs in phakic eyes remain challenging due to limited evidence on optimal management. This systematic review aims to evaluate current surgical approaches for repairing large traumatic CDCs in phakic eyes, focusing on success rates, complication profiles, and the impact of treatment timing on outcomes.
methodsA systematic search of three databases was conducted in November 2023, following PRISMA guidelines, to identify peer-reviewed studies and case reports published since 2000. Eligible cases included patients older than 14 years with phakic eyes who underwent treatment for traumatic CDCs involving ≥ 180°. The risk of bias was evaluated using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Case Reports. Cases were categorized based on primary repair method and compared according to outcomes and complications. Registration was not applicable.
resultsWe retrieved 284 publications, out of which 23 met the inclusion criteria, representing 43 eligible cases. No randomized controlled or interventional studies were identified. Mean age was 39 years, average baseline intraocular pressure (IOP) was 3.82 ± 2.31 mmHg, and mean cleft size was 8.6 ± 2.61 clock-hours. The two most common treatment approaches were direct cyclopexy and vitrectomy with or without additions. Successful cleft closure after a single intervention was achieved in 32 cases (74.4%). Vitrectomy-based procedures and direct cyclopexy produced similar postoperative IOP levels, although IOP spikes were more common after direct cyclopexy. Cataract alone did not influence treatment selection, whereas lens instability often necessitated an internal approach. Delayed intervention in eyes with intermediate baseline visual acuity did not appear to worsen outcomes, though late-treated eyes underwent more interventions. DISCUSSION: Large traumatic CDCs in phakic eyes were usually managed either externally by cyclopexy or internally with vitrectomy-based procedures, with favorable outcomes in both approaches. The available evidence on treatment approaches is limited by publication bias and inconsistent reporting. Future standardized, structured case reporting is essential to improve comparative evaluation and guide future management strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42550259What 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.