Background
Glaucoma is a leading cause of blindness worldwide. It results in a
progressive loss of peripheral vision and, in late stages, loss of central
vision leading to blindness. Early treatment of glaucoma aims to prevent or
delay vision loss. Elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) is the main causal
modifiable risk factor for glaucoma. Aqueous outflow obstruction is the main
cause of IOP elevation, which can be mitigated either by increasing outflow
or reducing aqueous humor production. Cyclodestructive procedures use
various methods to target and destroy the ciliary body epithelium, the site
of aqueous humor production, thereby lowering IOP. The most common approach
is laser cyclophotocoagulation.
Objectives
To assess the effectiveness and safety of cyclodestructive
procedures for the management of non-refractory glaucoma (i.e. glaucoma in
an eye that has not undergone incisional glaucoma surgery). We also aimed to
compare the effect of different routes of administration, laser delivery
instruments, and parameters of cyclophotocoagulation with respect to IOP
control, visual acuity, pain control, and adverse events.
Search methods
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials
(CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register)
(2017, Issue 8); Ovid MEDLINE; Embase.com; LILACS; the metaRegister of
Controlled Trials (mRCT) and ClinicalTrials.gov . The date of the search was 7 August
2017. We also searched the reference lists of reports from included
studies.
Selection criteria
We included randomized controlled trials of participants who had
undergone cyclodestruction as a primary treatment for glaucoma. We included
only head-to-head trials that had compared cyclophotocoagulation to other
procedural interventions, or compared cyclophotocoagulation using different
types of lasers, delivery methods, parameters, or a combination of these
factors.
Data collection and analysis
Two review authors independently screened search results, assessed
risks of bias, extracted data, and graded the certainty of the evidence in
accordance with Cochrane standards.
Main results
We included one trial (92 eyes of 92 participants) that evaluated
the efficacy of diode transscleral cyclophotocoagulation (TSCPC) as primary
surgical therapy. We identified no other eligible ongoing or completed
trial. The included trial compared low-energy versus high-energy TSCPC in
eyes with primary open-angle glaucoma. The trial was conducted in Ghana and
had a mean follow-up period of 13.2 months post-treatment. In this trial,
low-energy TSCPC was defined as 45.0 J delivered, high-energy as 65.5 J
delivered; it is worth noting that other trials have defined high- and
low-energy TSCPC differently. We assessed this trial to have had low risk of
selection bias and reporting bias, unclear risk of performance bias, and
high risk of detection bias and attrition bias. Trial authors excluded 13
participants with missing follow-up data; the analyses therefore included 40
(85%) of 47 participants in the low-energy ...