2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.oftal.2018.08.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Eficacia y seguridad de la ciclofotocoagulación transescleral con micropulsos en el tratamiento del glaucoma

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“… 9 Even though both MPTLT and CW-CPC are non-invasive repeatable procedures, MPTLT is probably superior to CW-CPC for several reasons. Firstly, the cooling effect of MPTLT has demonstrated significantly fewer serious complications 10 , 11 and can be used safely in patients with good visual potential. 13 Secondly, MPTLT has shown better efficacy, especially in tumor-related patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“… 9 Even though both MPTLT and CW-CPC are non-invasive repeatable procedures, MPTLT is probably superior to CW-CPC for several reasons. Firstly, the cooling effect of MPTLT has demonstrated significantly fewer serious complications 10 , 11 and can be used safely in patients with good visual potential. 13 Secondly, MPTLT has shown better efficacy, especially in tumor-related patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…MPTLT is different from conventional CW-CPC as the laser power in MPTLT is emitted using an on-and-off mode which protects adjacent tissues from thermal damage and reduces serious complications such as hypotony and phthisis bulbi. 10 , 11 The proposed mechanisms of IOP reduction are a diminution of aqueous production and aqueous outflow enhancement of both trabecular and uveoscleral outflows. 12 MPTLT has been used effectively and safely for both refractory glaucoma and for glaucoma patients with good central vision.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Surgeons worldwide have used a wide range of treatment parameter combinations with varying clinical efficacy in terms of the magnitude of intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction, success rate, durability, and safety profile. [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] This has created difficulty in selecting the proper parameter sets necessary to optimize efficacy and safety, and difficulty in comparing results from one investigation to another.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%