IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0296849.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Phacoemulsification combined with goniosynechialysis versus phacoemulsification alone for patients with primary angle‑closure disease: A meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Lin Yao
  • Haitao Wang
  • Yunxiao Wang
  • Pengpeng Zhao
  • Haiqing Bai

Abstract

This meta-analysis aims to systematically compare the efficacy between phacoemulsification (PE) combined with goniosynechialysis (GSL) and PE alone for primary angle-closure disease (PACD) patients. All the data were searched from the PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library. The Cochrane Handbook was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. Additionally, this meta-analysis was performed by using the Revman 5.4 software. Nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this study. Compared with PE alone group, PE+GSL could result significant reduction in the IOP (MD, 1.81; p = 0.002). In the instrumental subgroup, also more reduction of IOP was shown in the PE+GSL group (MD, 2.11; p = 0.02). In the viscogonioplasty (VGP) subgroup, there was not no statistical difference between PE alone group and PE+GSL group (MD, 1.53; p = 0.11). Also, more reduction of peripheral anterior synechiae (PAS) was shown in the PE+GSL group (MD,59.15; p

Suggested Citation

  • Lin Yao & Haitao Wang & Yunxiao Wang & Pengpeng Zhao & Haiqing Bai, 2024. "Phacoemulsification combined with goniosynechialysis versus phacoemulsification alone for patients with primary angle‑closure disease: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(2), pages 1-13, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0296849
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0296849
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0296849
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0296849&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0296849?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0296849. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.