Elsevier

Ophthalmology

Volume 109, Issue 10, October 2002, Pages 1902-1913
Ophthalmology

Article for CME credit
Surgical strategies for coexisting glaucoma and cataract: An evidence-based update1 ,

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-6420(02)01267-8Get rights and content

Abstract

Objective

To assess short- and long-term control of intraocular pressure (IOP) with different surgical treatment strategies for coexisting cataract and glaucoma.

Design

Systematic literature review and analysis.

Method

We performed a search of the published literature to identify all eligible articles pertaining to the surgical management of coexisting cataract and glaucoma in adults. One investigator abstracted the content of each article onto a custom-designed form. A second investigator corroborated the findings. The evidence supporting different approaches was graded by consensus as good, fair, weak, or insufficient.

Main outcome measures

Short-term (24 hours or fewer) and long-term (more than 24 hours) IOP control.

Results

The evidence was good that long-term IOP is lowered more by combined glaucoma and cataract operations than by cataract operations alone. On average, the IOP was 3 to 4 mmHg lower in the combined groups with fewer medications required. The evidence was weak that extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) alone results in short-term increase in IOP and was insufficient to determine the short-term impact of phacoemulsification cataract extraction (PECE) on IOP in glaucoma patients. The evidence was weak that short-term IOP control was better with ECCE or PECE combined with an incisional glaucoma procedure compared with ECCE or PECE alone. The evidence was also weak (but consistent) that long-term IOP is lowered by 2 to 4 mmHg after ECCE or PECE. Finally, there was weak evidence that combined PECE and trabeculectomy produces slightly worse long-term IOP control than trabeculectomy alone, and there was fair evidence that the same is true for ECCE combined with trabeculectomy.

Conclusions

There is strong evidence for better long-term control of IOP with combined glaucoma and cataract operations compared with cataract surgery alone. For other issues regarding surgical treatment strategies for cataract and glaucoma, the available evidence is limited or conflicting.

Section snippets

Methods

We searched the literature to identify articles addressing the management of glaucoma patients with coexisting cataract. The methods used to identify and select the studies to be included in this report are described in detail elsewhere.1 Briefly, the search was restricted to studies published from 1964 through March 2000 on adult patients with glaucoma and cataract. Several literature sources were used to identify all studies that potentially were relevant to the surgical treatment of patients

Results

The initial search identified 919 citations possibly addressing the study topic, of which 131 citations were deemed eligible for full article review. Abstracts were ineligible for full article review if they were not applicable to the study questions (1.8% of excluded abstracts), if the citation met an exclusion criterion (98% of excluded abstracts), or for a combination of the above. Twenty-one of the 131 citations deemed eligible for full review based on the abstracts were later found to be

Discussion

Our systematic review of the literature regarding the short- and long-term control of IOP after surgical management of patients with coexisting cataract and glaucoma offers important insights into the state of knowledge regarding the optimal treatment of these individuals. Table 4 summarizes the evidence in support of the major findings.

The current report has potential limitations. Although effort was made to include multiple sources in the literature search, including electronic databases and

References (47)

  • L.B. Bloomberg

    Modified trabeculectomy/trabeculotomy with no-stitch cataract surgery

    J Cataract Refract Surg

    (1996)
  • F. el-Sayyad et al.

    One-site versus 2-site phacotrabeculectomya randomized study

    J Cataract Refract Surg

    (1999)
  • P.N. Arnold

    No-stitch phacotrabeculectomy

    J Cataract Refract Surg

    (1996)
  • D.L. McCartney et al.

    The efficacy and safety of combined trabeculectomy, cataract extraction, and intraocular lens implantation

    Ophthalmology

    (1988)
  • C.B. Yu et al.

    Long-term results of combined cataract and glaucoma surgery versus trabeculectomy alone in low-risk patients

    J Cataract Refract Surg

    (1996)
  • B. Manoj et al.

    Effect of extracapsular cataract extraction and phacoemulsification performed after trabeculectomy on intraocular pressure

    J Cataract Refract Surg

    (2000)
  • L. Burratto et al.

    Extracapsular cataract surgery and intraocular lens implantation in glaucomatous eyes that had a filtering bleb operation

    J Cataract Refract Surg

    (1990)
  • P.P. Chen et al.

    Trabeculectomy function after cataract extraction

    Ophthalmology

    (1998)
  • M. Egger et al.

    Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German

    Lancet

    (1997)
  • D. Moher et al.

    Completeness of reporting of trials published in languages other than Englishimplications for conduct and reporting of systematic reviews

    Lancet

    (1996)
  • G. Gregoire et al.

    Selecting the language of the publications included in a meta-analysisis there a Tower of Babel bias?

    J Clin Epidemiol

    (1995)
  • Jampel HD, Lubomski LH, Friedman DS, et al. Treatment of Coexisting Cataract and Glaucoma. Baltimore: Evidence-Based...
  • A.C. Justice et al.

    Does masking author identity improve peer review quality? A randomized controlled trial. PEER Investigators

    JAMA

    (1998)
  • Cited by (174)

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Supported by the National Eye Institute, Bethesda, Maryland (grant nos.: K23-EY00358 [DSF], K23-EY00386 [JHK], K23-EY00388 [NC]); and Research to Prevent Blindness, Inc., New York, New York (Robert E. McCormick Award [DSF] and Career Development Award [NC]).

    1

    This article is based on research conducted by the Johns Hopkins University Evidence-based Practice Center under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (formerly, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research), contract no. 290-97-0006, Rockville, Maryland. The authors of this article are responsible for its contents, including any clinical or treatment recommendations. No statement in this article should be construed as an official position of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality or the United States Department of Health and Human Services.

    View full text