报告微创青光眼手术的结果。

IF 3 2区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY Current Opinion in Ophthalmology Pub Date : 2024-10-29 DOI:10.1097/ICU.0000000000001100
Naomi E Gutkind, Steven J Gedde
{"title":"报告微创青光眼手术的结果。","authors":"Naomi E Gutkind, Steven J Gedde","doi":"10.1097/ICU.0000000000001100","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>This review presents guidelines for designing studies and reporting efficacy and safety outcomes in minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) research.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Adherence to reporting guidelines in MIGS studies is crucial for providers and patients to appraise surgical options. Recent guidelines have outlined appropriate methodology, efficacy outcomes, and safety reporting, so that study results are presented in an interpretable and uniform manner.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>MIGS are changing the glaucoma treatment paradigm by offering safer, less invasive alternatives to traditional filtering surgery. However, inconsistent reporting of outcomes in MIGS trials hampers comparison and clinical decision-making. Recent guidelines have aimed to highlight appropriate methodology and encourage standardization in reporting outcomes to improve the quality of MIGS literature. Key considerations include defining baseline intraocular pressure, reporting standardized demographic data, using consistent endpoints, presenting standardized figures, evaluating medication use, and documenting adverse events. By adhering to these guidelines, MIGS trials can offer clearer insights into surgical outcomes, aiding both surgeons and patients in treatment decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":50604,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reporting outcomes of minimally invasive glaucoma surgery.\",\"authors\":\"Naomi E Gutkind, Steven J Gedde\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/ICU.0000000000001100\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>This review presents guidelines for designing studies and reporting efficacy and safety outcomes in minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) research.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Adherence to reporting guidelines in MIGS studies is crucial for providers and patients to appraise surgical options. Recent guidelines have outlined appropriate methodology, efficacy outcomes, and safety reporting, so that study results are presented in an interpretable and uniform manner.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>MIGS are changing the glaucoma treatment paradigm by offering safer, less invasive alternatives to traditional filtering surgery. However, inconsistent reporting of outcomes in MIGS trials hampers comparison and clinical decision-making. Recent guidelines have aimed to highlight appropriate methodology and encourage standardization in reporting outcomes to improve the quality of MIGS literature. Key considerations include defining baseline intraocular pressure, reporting standardized demographic data, using consistent endpoints, presenting standardized figures, evaluating medication use, and documenting adverse events. By adhering to these guidelines, MIGS trials can offer clearer insights into surgical outcomes, aiding both surgeons and patients in treatment decisions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50604,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Ophthalmology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/ICU.0000000000001100\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ICU.0000000000001100","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

综述目的:本综述介绍了微创青光眼手术(MIGS)研究中设计研究和报告疗效与安全性结果的指南:遵守微创青光眼手术研究的报告指南对于医疗机构和患者评估手术方案至关重要。摘要:微创青光眼手术为传统滤过手术提供了更安全、创伤更小的替代方案,从而改变了青光眼治疗模式。然而,MIGS 试验结果报告的不一致妨碍了比较和临床决策。近期的指南旨在强调适当的方法并鼓励结果报告的标准化,以提高 MIGS 文献的质量。主要考虑因素包括定义基线眼压、报告标准化的人口统计学数据、使用一致的终点、呈现标准化的数字、评估药物使用情况以及记录不良事件。通过遵守这些准则,MIGS 试验可以更清楚地了解手术效果,帮助外科医生和患者做出治疗决定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Reporting outcomes of minimally invasive glaucoma surgery.

Purpose of review: This review presents guidelines for designing studies and reporting efficacy and safety outcomes in minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) research.

Recent findings: Adherence to reporting guidelines in MIGS studies is crucial for providers and patients to appraise surgical options. Recent guidelines have outlined appropriate methodology, efficacy outcomes, and safety reporting, so that study results are presented in an interpretable and uniform manner.

Summary: MIGS are changing the glaucoma treatment paradigm by offering safer, less invasive alternatives to traditional filtering surgery. However, inconsistent reporting of outcomes in MIGS trials hampers comparison and clinical decision-making. Recent guidelines have aimed to highlight appropriate methodology and encourage standardization in reporting outcomes to improve the quality of MIGS literature. Key considerations include defining baseline intraocular pressure, reporting standardized demographic data, using consistent endpoints, presenting standardized figures, evaluating medication use, and documenting adverse events. By adhering to these guidelines, MIGS trials can offer clearer insights into surgical outcomes, aiding both surgeons and patients in treatment decisions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
5.40%
发文量
120
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Current Opinion in Ophthalmology is an indispensable resource featuring key up-to-date and important advances in the field from around the world. With renowned guest editors for each section, every bimonthly issue of Current Opinion in Ophthalmology delivers a fresh insight into topics such as glaucoma, refractive surgery and corneal and external disorders. With ten sections in total, the journal provides a convenient and thorough review of the field and will be of interest to researchers, clinicians and other healthcare professionals alike.
期刊最新文献
The effect of cataract surgery on lowering intraocular pressure. Artificial intelligence in ophthalmology. A comprehensive update on over the counter artificial tears. Challenges and outcomes of cataract surgery after vitrectomy. Cataract surgery combined with glaucoma surgery.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1