Repeat Selective Laser Trabeculoplasty for Glaucoma Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate repeat selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) for treating primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, CINAHL, and EMBASE were systematically searched along with grey literature. All English articles that measured intraocular pressure (IOP) before and after repeat SLT on adult patients with POAG were included. Studies were not filtered by location or publication date. Covidence was used to screen imported articles. Risk of bias assessment and data extraction was performed after screening. Meta-analysis was performed using STATA 16.0. Fixed-effect or random-effects models were developed depending on the presence of heterogeneity. RESULTS: Database and grey literature search identified 512 unique studies. After duplicate removal and screening, 12 articles were included and data from included studies were synthesized. Nine articles were included in the meta-analysis. Three studies were prospective observational studies, and nine studies were retrospective chart reviews. Due to the presence of heterogeneity, a random-effects model has been utilized that suggested significant IOP reduction (IOPR) by repeat SLT at 24 months follow-up. CONCLUSION: Based on our results, repeat SLT could be an effective procedure in reducing IOP for patients with glaucoma for up to 24 months. Efficacy of third, fourth, or further SLT remains to be verified. More data from long-term, high-quality randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) are required to make conclusions. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Repeat SLT may be an effective treatment for lowering IOP with minimal complications or safety issues. This may allow the use of SLT as a primary treatment for POGA, allowing the discontinuation of medications or eye drops and lead to additional benefits. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Repeat Selective Laser Trabeculoplasty for Glaucoma Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. J Curr Glaucoma Pract 2021;15(3):117-124.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".