Phacoemulsification Combined With Endoscopic Versus Transscleral Cyclophotocoagulation in Poorly Controlled Glaucoma: A Comparative Case Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to report medium-term outcomes of a novel combination of phacoemulsification with transscleral cyclophotocoagulation (phaco-TCP) compared with combined phacoemulsification and endoscopic cyclophotocoagulation (phaco-ECP) in patients with uncontrolled or suboptimally controlled glaucoma and coexisting cataract. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective case series of 80 consecutive patients with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up. In total, 46 eyes underwent phaco-ECP and 34 phaco-TCP. Success was defined as intraocular pressure (IOP) between 6 and 21 mm Hg with ≥20% reduction from preoperative IOP (with no increase in ocular hypotensive medications or further glaucoma surgery). Secondary outcomes were change in IOP, number of ocular hypotensive medications and safety. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 32.6 ±10.3 months. Preoperative clinical characteristics were similar in both groups. At latest follow-up, success rate was greater with phaco-TCP than phaco-ECP (67.6% and 47.8%, P=0.037). IOP was also significantly lower after phaco-TCP (14.88±5.57 mm Hg, from 22.62±6.52 mm Hg) than phaco-ECP (18.07±6.72 mm Hg, from 22.83±7.88, P=0.0273). Ocular hypotensive medications required reduced similarly after phaco-TCP (from 3.38±0.88 to 2.65±1.04 medications, P=0.0012) and phaco-ECP (from 3.07±0.929 to 2.63±1.42 medications, P=0.0108). There were no cases of hypotony or reduction in vision related to glaucoma with either surgical intervention and a similar proportion required further glaucoma surgery (phaco-ECP 15.2%, phako-TCP 5.9%, P=0.2884). CONCLUSIONS: Phaco-TCP appears more successful in controlling IOP than phaco-ECP with similar safety. Further investigation is warranted of this newly proposed combination which may be particularly useful where access or experience with ECP or other minimally invasive glaucoma surgery is limited.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".