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.	鐘華, 余敏斌. 原發性閉角型青光眼流行病學研究進展. 眼科學報, 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.	中華醫學會眼科學會青光眼組. 原發性青光眼早期診斷的初步建議. 中華眼科雜志, 1987, 23(2): 127.
15.	趙燕, 常英霞, 王國強, 等. 超聲乳化白內障吸除聯合小梁切除術對急性閉角型青光眼合并老年性白內障的療效及安全性. 中國老年學雜志, 2016, 36(20): 5118-5119.
16.	趙德勝. 超聲乳化白內障吸除聯合人工晶狀體植入及竇小梁切除術治療青光眼合并白內障的臨床觀察. 中華眼科醫學雜志(電子版), 2014, 4(3): 149-153.
17.	王曉霞, 趙燕華. 超聲乳化吸除聯合人工晶狀體植入治療原發性閉角型青光眼合并老年性白內障的臨床觀察. 廣州醫科大學學報, 2014, 42(5): 40-42.
18.	奉紅波. 白內障超聲乳化摘除聯合小梁切除術在慢性閉角型青光眼中的應用效果. 中國醫藥指南, 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.	陽光. 白內障合并青光眼不同聯合手術方式的療效比較. 海南醫學院學報, 2012, 18(12): 1811-1813.
21.	陳迎三. 兩種治療原發閉角型青光眼合并白內障的手術方法療效觀察. 吉林醫學, 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.	張洪洋, 余敏斌, 頓中軍. 白內障超聲乳化術與超聲乳化聯合小梁切除術治療原發性閉角型青光眼Meta分析. 中華實驗眼科雜志, 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. 鐘華, 余敏斌. 原發性閉角型青光眼流行病學研究進展. 眼科學報, 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. 中華醫學會眼科學會青光眼組. 原發性青光眼早期診斷的初步建議. 中華眼科雜志, 1987, 23(2): 127.
15. 趙燕, 常英霞, 王國強, 等. 超聲乳化白內障吸除聯合小梁切除術對急性閉角型青光眼合并老年性白內障的療效及安全性. 中國老年學雜志, 2016, 36(20): 5118-5119.
16. 趙德勝. 超聲乳化白內障吸除聯合人工晶狀體植入及竇小梁切除術治療青光眼合并白內障的臨床觀察. 中華眼科醫學雜志(電子版), 2014, 4(3): 149-153.
17. 王曉霞, 趙燕華. 超聲乳化吸除聯合人工晶狀體植入治療原發性閉角型青光眼合并老年性白內障的臨床觀察. 廣州醫科大學學報, 2014, 42(5): 40-42.
18. 奉紅波. 白內障超聲乳化摘除聯合小梁切除術在慢性閉角型青光眼中的應用效果. 中國醫藥指南, 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. 陽光. 白內障合并青光眼不同聯合手術方式的療效比較. 海南醫學院學報, 2012, 18(12): 1811-1813.
21. 陳迎三. 兩種治療原發閉角型青光眼合并白內障的手術方法療效觀察. 吉林醫學, 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. 張洪洋, 余敏斌, 頓中軍. 白內障超聲乳化術與超聲乳化聯合小梁切除術治療原發性閉角型青光眼Meta分析. 中華實驗眼科雜志, 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