Effects of Lens Extraction versus Laser Peripheral Iridotomy on Anterior Segment Parameters in Primary Angle Closure Suspects: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background Primary angle closure suspect (PACS) is characterized by an anatomically narrow anterior chamber angle, predisposing individuals to angle closure and subsequent glaucomatous damage. Prophylactic interventions including laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI) and lens extraction (LE) can be employed to mitigate this risk, especially in high-risk patients. While both procedures aim to widen the iridocorneal angle, their comparative efficacy in improving anterior segment parameters remains a subject of ongoing investigation. Purpose This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the comparative effects of lens extraction (LE) and laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI) on anterior segment parameters in primary angle closure suspects (PACS). The analysis encompassed a range of metrics, including angle opening distance (AOD), trabecular iris space area (TISA), trabecular iris angle (TIA), iris curvature (I-CURV), trabecular-ciliary process distance (TCPD), lens vault (LV), and mean Shaffer gonioscopy grading. Method A comprehensive search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science (WOS), and Cochrane Library to identify studies comparing the effects of laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI) and lens extraction (LE) on anterior segment morphology. Studies of all original design were included except case reports and case series. Effect estimates for continuous outcomes were expressed as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager (version 5.4). The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) tool. Results Four studies met the inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis. LE demonstrated consistently greater improvements compared to LPI in both short-term (1 month) and long-term (2 years) follow-up across all evaluated metrics. At one month, LE resulted in significantly larger anterior chamber angle metrics, including AOD500 and AOD750 (mean differences: -0.19 mm and -0.26 mm, respectively; both p < 0.00001), with these effects persisting at two years. Similarly, TISA500 and TISA750 were notably larger after LE (mean differences: -0.07 mm² and -0.21 mm²; both p < 0.00001). LE also achieved a greater reduction in TIA (-21.85 °; p < 0.00001), while I-CURV and TCPD improvements significantly favored LE (both p < 0.00001). Additionally, LV increased more substantially following LE (0.86 mm; p < 0.00001). Mean Shaffer gonioscopy grading also showed superior outcomes with LE (Standardized mean difference (SMD): -2.49; p < 0.00001). Conclusion LE consistently enhances anterior chamber dimensions, including AOD, TISA, and TIA, with benefits sustained for up to two years in patients with PACS. These anatomical improvements suggest a more effective long-term approach to reducing intraocular pressure and preventing disease progression. Clinicians should consider early LE in appropriate patients to optimize angle widening and minimize the need for additional interventions.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle