TY - JOUR

T1 - What Do We Really Know about the Effectiveness of Glaucoma Interventions?

T2 - An Overview of Systematic Reviews

AU - Qureshi, Riaz

AU - Azuara-Blanco, Augusto

AU - Michelessi, Manuele

AU - Virgili, Gianni

AU - Barbosa Breda, João

AU - Cutolo, Carlo Alberto

AU - Pazos, Marta

AU - Katsanos, Andreas

AU - Garhöfer, Gerhard

AU - Kolko, Miriam

AU - Prokosch-Willing, Verena

AU - Al Rajhi, Ali Ahmed

AU - Lum, Flora

AU - Musch, David

AU - Gedde, Steven

AU - Li, Tianjing

N1 - Publisher Copyright: Copyright © 2021 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

PY - 2021

Y1 - 2021

N2 - PURPOSE: To identify systematic reviews of interventions for glaucoma conditions and to assess their reliability, thereby generating a list of potentially reliable reviews for updating glaucoma practice guidelines. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Systematic reviews of interventions for glaucoma conditions. METHODS: We used a database of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in vision research and eye care maintained by the Cochrane Eyes and Vision United States Satellite. We examined all Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions for glaucoma conditions published before August 7, 2019, and all non-Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions for glaucoma conditions published between January 1, 2014, and August 7, 2019. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We assessed eligible reviews for reliability, extracted characteristics, and summarized key findings from reviews classified as reliable. RESULTS: Of the 4451 systematic reviews in eyes and vision identified, 129 met our eligibility criteria and were assessed for reliability. Of these, we classified 49 (38%) as reliable. We found open-angle glaucoma (22/49) to be the condition with the most reviews and medical management (17/49) and intraocular pressure (IOP; 43/49) to be the most common interventions and outcomes studied. Most reviews found a high degree of uncertainty in the evidence, which hinders the possibility of making strong recommendations in guidelines. These reviews found high-certainty evidence about a few topics: reducing IOP helps to prevent glaucoma and its progression, prostaglandin analogs are the most effective medical treatment for lowering IOP, laser trabeculoplasty is as effective as medical treatment as a first-line therapy in controlling IOP, the use of IOP-lowering medications in the perioperative or postoperative periods to accompany laser (e.g., trabeculoplasty) reduces the risk of postoperative IOP spikes, conventional surgery (i.e., trabeculectomy) is more effective than medications in reducing IOP, and antimetabolites and β-radiation improve IOP control after trabeculectomy. The evidence is weak regarding the effectiveness of minimally invasive glaucoma surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: Most systematic reviews evaluating interventions for glaucoma are of poor reliability. Even among those that may be considered reliable, important limitations exist in the value of information because of the uncertainty of the evidence as well as small and sometimes unimportant clinical differences between interventions.

AB - PURPOSE: To identify systematic reviews of interventions for glaucoma conditions and to assess their reliability, thereby generating a list of potentially reliable reviews for updating glaucoma practice guidelines. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Systematic reviews of interventions for glaucoma conditions. METHODS: We used a database of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in vision research and eye care maintained by the Cochrane Eyes and Vision United States Satellite. We examined all Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions for glaucoma conditions published before August 7, 2019, and all non-Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions for glaucoma conditions published between January 1, 2014, and August 7, 2019. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We assessed eligible reviews for reliability, extracted characteristics, and summarized key findings from reviews classified as reliable. RESULTS: Of the 4451 systematic reviews in eyes and vision identified, 129 met our eligibility criteria and were assessed for reliability. Of these, we classified 49 (38%) as reliable. We found open-angle glaucoma (22/49) to be the condition with the most reviews and medical management (17/49) and intraocular pressure (IOP; 43/49) to be the most common interventions and outcomes studied. Most reviews found a high degree of uncertainty in the evidence, which hinders the possibility of making strong recommendations in guidelines. These reviews found high-certainty evidence about a few topics: reducing IOP helps to prevent glaucoma and its progression, prostaglandin analogs are the most effective medical treatment for lowering IOP, laser trabeculoplasty is as effective as medical treatment as a first-line therapy in controlling IOP, the use of IOP-lowering medications in the perioperative or postoperative periods to accompany laser (e.g., trabeculoplasty) reduces the risk of postoperative IOP spikes, conventional surgery (i.e., trabeculectomy) is more effective than medications in reducing IOP, and antimetabolites and β-radiation improve IOP control after trabeculectomy. The evidence is weak regarding the effectiveness of minimally invasive glaucoma surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: Most systematic reviews evaluating interventions for glaucoma are of poor reliability. Even among those that may be considered reliable, important limitations exist in the value of information because of the uncertainty of the evidence as well as small and sometimes unimportant clinical differences between interventions.

KW - Evidence-based medicine

KW - Glaucoma

KW - Guideline development

KW - Systematic reviews

U2 - 10.1016/j.ogla.2021.01.007

DO - 10.1016/j.ogla.2021.01.007

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 33571689

AN - SCOPUS:85110520274

VL - 4

SP - 454

EP - 462

JO - Ophthalmology. Glaucoma

JF - Ophthalmology. Glaucoma

SN - 2589-4196

IS - 5

ER -