Phacotrabeculectomy combined with trabeculectomy for primary angle closure glaucoma with cataract: a systematic review_Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Authors：

YU Xiaojiao , CHEN Chunlin , ZHOU Jiaxing ,  YE Jian

Department of Ophthalmology, Institute of Surgery Research, The Third Affiliated Hospital, Army Medical University, Chongqing, 400042, P.R.China;

Corresponding author：

YE Jian, Email: yejian1979@163.com

Keywords：

Phacoemulsification; Trabeculectomy; Primary angle closure glaucoma; Randomized controlled trial; Systematic review

DOI：

10.7507/1672-2531.201707089

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of phacoemulsification combined with trabeculectomy versus simple phacoemulsification for primary angle closure glaucoma with cataract.MethodsDatabases including PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data were searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about phacoemulsification combined with trabeculectomy vs. simple phacoemulsification for primary angle closure glaucoma with cataract from inception to May 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then meta-analysis was conducted by RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of eight studies involving 679 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: there were no significant differences between two groups in postoperative visual acuity (MD=0.00, 95%CI –0.10 to 0.09, P=0.98), postoperative anterior chamber depth (MD=0.14, 95%CI –0.17 to 0.45, P=0.37) and adverse reactions rates (optic nerve injury: RR=1.56, 95%CI 0.70 to 3.47, P=0.28; visual field defect: RR=1.43, 95%CI 0.70 to 2.92, P=0.33; corneal edema: RR=0.57, 95%CI 0.25 to 1.32, P=0.19).ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that phacoemulsification combined with trabeculectomy and simple phacoemulsification has the similar efficacy and safety for primary angle closure glaucoma with cataract. Due to limited quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusions still need to be verified by more high quality studies.

Citation： YU Xiaojiao, CHEN Chunlin, ZHOU Jiaxing, YE Jian. Phacotrabeculectomy combined with trabeculectomy for primary angle closure glaucoma with cataract: a systematic review. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2018, 18(2): 201-207. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.201707089 Copy

1.	WHO. Global Data on Visual Impairments 2010 (WHO/NMH/PBD/12.01). Geneva: World Health Organization, 2012.
2.	Quigley HA, Broman AT. The number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020. Br J Ophthalmol, 2006, 90(3): 262-267.
3.	Tham YC, Li X, Wong TY, et al. Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology, 2014, 121(11): 2081-2090.
4.	Frick KD, Gower EW, Kempen JH, et al. Economic impact of visual impairment and blindness in the United States. Arch Ophthalmol, 2007, 125(4): 544-550.
5.	Weinreb RN, Aung T, Medeiros FA. The pathophysiology and treatment of glaucoma: a review. JAMA, 2014, 311(18): 1901-1911.
6.	钟华, 余敏斌. 原发性闭角型青光眼流行病学研究进展. 眼科学报, 2007, 23(3): 186-192.
7.	Day AC, Baio G, Gazzard G, et al. The prevalence of primary angle closure glaucoma in European derived populations: a systematic review. Br J Ophthalmol, 2012; 96: 1162-1167.
8.	Leite MT, Sakata LM, Medeiros FA. Managing glaucoma in developing countries. Arq Bras Oftalmol, 2011, 74(2): 83-84.
9.	Rotchford AP, Kirwan JF, Muller MA, et al. Temba glaucoma study: a population-based cross-sectional survey in urban South Africa. Ophthalmology, 2003, 110(2): 376-382.
10.	Hennis A, Wu SY, Nemesure B, et al. Awareness of incident open-angle glaucoma in a population study: the Barbados Eye Studies. Ophthalmology, 2007, 114(10): 1816-1821.
11.	Sathyamangalam RV, Paul PG, George R, et al. Determinants of glaucoma awareness and knowledge in urban Chennai. Indian J Ophthalmol, 2009, 57(5): 355.
12.	Budenz DL, Barton K, Whiteside-de Vos J, et al. Prevalence of glaucoma in an urban West African population: the Tema Eye Survey. JAMA Ophthalmol, 2013, 131(5): 651-658.
13.	Azuara-Blanco A, Burr J, Ramsay C, et al. Effectiveness of early lens extraction for the treatment of primary angle-closure glaucoma (EAGLE): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 2016, 388(10052): 1389-1397.
14.	中华医学会眼科学会青光眼组. 原发性青光眼早期诊断的初步建议. 中华眼科杂志, 1987, 23(2): 127.
15.	赵燕, 常英霞, 王国强, 等. 超声乳化白内障吸除联合小梁切除术对急性闭角型青光眼合并老年性白内障的疗效及安全性. 中国老年学杂志, 2016, 36(20): 5118-5119.
16.	赵德胜. 超声乳化白内障吸除联合人工晶状体植入及窦小梁切除术治疗青光眼合并白内障的临床观察. 中华眼科医学杂志(电子版), 2014, 4(3): 149-153.
17.	王晓霞, 赵燕华. 超声乳化吸除联合人工晶状体植入治疗原发性闭角型青光眼合并老年性白内障的临床观察. 广州医科大学学报, 2014, 42(5): 40-42.
18.	奉红波. 白内障超声乳化摘除联合小梁切除术在慢性闭角型青光眼中的应用效果. 中国医药指南, 2013, 11(29): 50-51.
19.	Paul C, Sengupta S, Paul A. Comparison of phacoemulsification versus phacotrabeculectomy in the treatment of patients with chronic angle closure glaucoma and concomitant cataract. J Clin Ophthalmol Res, 2014, 2(2): 93-98.
20.	阳光. 白内障合并青光眼不同联合手术方式的疗效比较. 海南医学院学报, 2012, 18(12): 1811-1813.
21.	陈迎三. 两种治疗原发闭角型青光眼合并白内障的手术方法疗效观察. 吉林医学, 2011, 32(15): 2975-2975.
22.	Tham CCY, Kwong YY, Leung DYL, et al. Phacoemulsification versus combined phacotrabeculectomy in medically controlled chronic angle closure glaucoma with cataract. Ophthalmology, 2008, 115(12): 2167-2173.
23.	Weinreb RN, Khaw PT. Primary open-angle glaucoma. Lancet, 2004, 363(9422): 1711-1720.
24.	He M, Foster PJ, Johnson GJ, et al. Angle-closure glaucoma in east Asian and European people. different diseases? Eye, 2006, 20(1): 3-12.
25.	Sakai H, Morine-Shinjyo S, Shinzato M, et al. Uveal effusion in primary angle-closure glaucoma. Ophthalmology, 2005, 112(3): 413-419.
26.	Teekhasaenee C, Ritch R. Combined phacoemulsification and goniosynechialysis for uncontrolled chronic angle-closure glaucoma after acute angle-closure glaucoma. Ophthalmology, 1999, 106(4): 669-675.
27.	Wang F, Wu ZH. Phacoemulsification versus combined phacotrabeculectomy in the treatment of primary angle-closure glaucoma with cataract: a meta-analysis. Int J Ophthalmol, 2016, 9(4): 597.
28.	张洪洋, 余敏斌, 顿中军. 白内障超声乳化术与超声乳化联合小梁切除术治疗原发性闭角型青光眼Meta分析. 中华实验眼科杂志, 2013, 31(3): 270-274.

1. WHO. Global Data on Visual Impairments 2010 (WHO/NMH/PBD/12.01). Geneva: World Health Organization, 2012.
2. Quigley HA, Broman AT. The number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020. Br J Ophthalmol, 2006, 90(3): 262-267.
3. Tham YC, Li X, Wong TY, et al. Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology, 2014, 121(11): 2081-2090.
4. Frick KD, Gower EW, Kempen JH, et al. Economic impact of visual impairment and blindness in the United States. Arch Ophthalmol, 2007, 125(4): 544-550.
5. Weinreb RN, Aung T, Medeiros FA. The pathophysiology and treatment of glaucoma: a review. JAMA, 2014, 311(18): 1901-1911.
6. 钟华, 余敏斌. 原发性闭角型青光眼流行病学研究进展. 眼科学报, 2007, 23(3): 186-192.
7. Day AC, Baio G, Gazzard G, et al. The prevalence of primary angle closure glaucoma in European derived populations: a systematic review. Br J Ophthalmol, 2012; 96: 1162-1167.
8. Leite MT, Sakata LM, Medeiros FA. Managing glaucoma in developing countries. Arq Bras Oftalmol, 2011, 74(2): 83-84.
9. Rotchford AP, Kirwan JF, Muller MA, et al. Temba glaucoma study: a population-based cross-sectional survey in urban South Africa. Ophthalmology, 2003, 110(2): 376-382.
10. Hennis A, Wu SY, Nemesure B, et al. Awareness of incident open-angle glaucoma in a population study: the Barbados Eye Studies. Ophthalmology, 2007, 114(10): 1816-1821.
11. Sathyamangalam RV, Paul PG, George R, et al. Determinants of glaucoma awareness and knowledge in urban Chennai. Indian J Ophthalmol, 2009, 57(5): 355.
12. Budenz DL, Barton K, Whiteside-de Vos J, et al. Prevalence of glaucoma in an urban West African population: the Tema Eye Survey. JAMA Ophthalmol, 2013, 131(5): 651-658.
13. Azuara-Blanco A, Burr J, Ramsay C, et al. Effectiveness of early lens extraction for the treatment of primary angle-closure glaucoma (EAGLE): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 2016, 388(10052): 1389-1397.
14. 中华医学会眼科学会青光眼组. 原发性青光眼早期诊断的初步建议. 中华眼科杂志, 1987, 23(2): 127.
15. 赵燕, 常英霞, 王国强, 等. 超声乳化白内障吸除联合小梁切除术对急性闭角型青光眼合并老年性白内障的疗效及安全性. 中国老年学杂志, 2016, 36(20): 5118-5119.
16. 赵德胜. 超声乳化白内障吸除联合人工晶状体植入及窦小梁切除术治疗青光眼合并白内障的临床观察. 中华眼科医学杂志(电子版), 2014, 4(3): 149-153.
17. 王晓霞, 赵燕华. 超声乳化吸除联合人工晶状体植入治疗原发性闭角型青光眼合并老年性白内障的临床观察. 广州医科大学学报, 2014, 42(5): 40-42.
18. 奉红波. 白内障超声乳化摘除联合小梁切除术在慢性闭角型青光眼中的应用效果. 中国医药指南, 2013, 11(29): 50-51.
19. Paul C, Sengupta S, Paul A. Comparison of phacoemulsification versus phacotrabeculectomy in the treatment of patients with chronic angle closure glaucoma and concomitant cataract. J Clin Ophthalmol Res, 2014, 2(2): 93-98.
20. 阳光. 白内障合并青光眼不同联合手术方式的疗效比较. 海南医学院学报, 2012, 18(12): 1811-1813.
21. 陈迎三. 两种治疗原发闭角型青光眼合并白内障的手术方法疗效观察. 吉林医学, 2011, 32(15): 2975-2975.
22. Tham CCY, Kwong YY, Leung DYL, et al. Phacoemulsification versus combined phacotrabeculectomy in medically controlled chronic angle closure glaucoma with cataract. Ophthalmology, 2008, 115(12): 2167-2173.
23. Weinreb RN, Khaw PT. Primary open-angle glaucoma. Lancet, 2004, 363(9422): 1711-1720.
24. He M, Foster PJ, Johnson GJ, et al. Angle-closure glaucoma in east Asian and European people. different diseases? Eye, 2006, 20(1): 3-12.
25. Sakai H, Morine-Shinjyo S, Shinzato M, et al. Uveal effusion in primary angle-closure glaucoma. Ophthalmology, 2005, 112(3): 413-419.
26. Teekhasaenee C, Ritch R. Combined phacoemulsification and goniosynechialysis for uncontrolled chronic angle-closure glaucoma after acute angle-closure glaucoma. Ophthalmology, 1999, 106(4): 669-675.
27. Wang F, Wu ZH. Phacoemulsification versus combined phacotrabeculectomy in the treatment of primary angle-closure glaucoma with cataract: a meta-analysis. Int J Ophthalmol, 2016, 9(4): 597.
28. 张洪洋, 余敏斌, 顿中军. 白内障超声乳化术与超声乳化联合小梁切除术治疗原发性闭角型青光眼Meta分析. 中华实验眼科杂志, 2013, 31(3): 270-274.

Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Phacotrabeculectomy combined with trabeculectomy for primary angle closure glaucoma with cataract: a systematic review

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content