ArticleInternational ophthalmology2026
Long-term visual field progression after Ex-PRESS implantation versus trabeculectomy in refractory glaucoma.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the long-term visual field progression between Ex-PRESS® filtration surgery and trabeculectomy in patients with medically uncontrolled glaucoma, focusing on functional outcomes rather than intraocular pressure (IOP) alone.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the cases of 109 eyes (Ex-PRESS: 51; trabeculectomy: 58) followed for ≥ 3 years at a single tertiary center. Eyes requiring additional glaucoma surgery within 36 months were excluded. Visual fields were assessed using Humphrey 24-2/30-2 or AP-7700 equivalent programs. Progression was quantified using the mean deviation (MD) slope (dB/year). We used a linear mixed-effects model with random intercepts for patients and eyes to compare visual field progression, adjusting for baseline factors (age, sex, BMI, SBP, baseline IOP, baseline MD, visual field program) and postoperative parameters (mean IOP, IOP fluctuation).
resultsBaseline age and pseudophakia were higher in the Ex-PRESS group, but postoperative IOP was comparable between groups (Ex-PRESS: 11.8 ± 2.6 mmHg; trabeculectomy: 11.4 ± 3.0 mmHg). Adjusted MD slopes were - 0.20 dB/year (95% CI - 0.35 to - 0.06) for Ex-PRESS and - 0.15 dB/year (95% CI - 0.28 to - 0.02) for trabeculectomy (p = 0.59). Subgroup analyses of 24-2/30-2 and 10-2 fields yielded consistent results. Diastolic blood pressure showed a weak correlation with the MD slope, but this was nonsignificant in a multivariable analysis.
conclusionsAmong eyes that remained free from reoperation during the first 36 postoperative months, no significant difference in long-term visual field progression was detected between Ex-PRESS implantation and trabeculectomy after statistical adjustment. Under well-controlled postoperative IOP conditions, non-IOP vascular factors may contribute to residual visual field progression. These findings contribute to the limited evidence regarding long-term visual field outcomes after Ex-PRESS implantation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42562937What 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.