Review Article
Microcatheter-Assisted Circumferential Trabeculotomy versus Conventional Trabeculotomy for the Treatment of Childhood Glaucoma: A Meta-analysis
Table 1
Baseline characteristics and quality of the eligible studies.
| | Study, year | Place | Mean age (months or years) | Study type | Number of eyes | Gender (female/male) | Baseline IOP (mmHg) | Outcomes | Quality score |
| | Celea et al. 2016 [7] | Romania | 5.37 ± 6.32
| Retrospective study | Group 1: 41
Group 2: 38 | None
None | Group 1:
Group 2: | Postoperative IOP | | | Shi et al. 2016 [8] | China |
| Retrospective case-control study | Group 1: 22
Group 2: 21 | 7/13
9/7 | Group 1:
Group 2: | Postoperative IOP, complete success rate, qualified success rate, number of medications | | | Lim et al. 2015 [12] | USA | (years)
(years) | Retrospective study | Group 1: 14
Group 2: 77 | None
None | Group 1:
Group 2: | Postoperative IOP, number of medications | | | El Sayed and Gawdat 2017 [15] | Egypt |
| Randomized controlled study | Group 1: 30
Controls: 32 | 11/19
13/19 | Group 1:
Group 2: | Postoperative IOP, complete success rate, qualified success rate, number of medications | 4 points | | Shakrawal et al. 2017 [16] | India |
| Randomized controlled study | Group 1: 20
Group 2: 20 | None
None | Group 1:
Group 2: | Postoperative IOP, complete success rate, qualified success rate | 4 points |
|
|
Group1: microcatheter-assisted circumferential trabeculotomy; Group2: conventional trabeculotomy; IOP: intraocular pressure.
|
