Guía terapéutica del glaucoma crónico por cierre angular primario

  1. F.J. Munoz-Negrete 1
  2. J. González-Martín-Moro 2
  3. P. Casas-Llera 3
  4. J.L. Urcelay-Segura 4
  5. G. Rebolleda 1
  6. F. Ussa 5
  7. N. Güerri Monclús 6
  8. C. Méndez Hernández 7
  9. J. Moreno-Montanés 8
  10. M.P. Villegas Pérez 9
  11. L.E. Pablo 6
  12. J. García-Feijoó 7
  1. 1 Servicio de Oftalmología, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, IRYCIS, Universidad de Alcalá, OFTARED, Alcalá de Henares, Madrid, Spain
  2. 2 Servicio de Oftalmología, Hospital Universitario del Henares, Universidad Francisco de Vitoria, Coslada, Madrid, Spain
  3. 3 Vissum Corporación-Instituto Oftalmológico de Alicante, OFTARED, Alicante, Spain
  4. 4 Servicio de Oftalmología, Hospital Universitario Gregorio Maranón, ˜ Madrid, Spain
  5. 5 IOBA, Universidad de Valladolid, OFTARED, Valladolid, Spain
  6. 6 Servicio de Oftalmología, Hospital Universitario Miguel Servet, IISA, Universidad de Zaragoza, OFTARED, Zaragoza, Spain
  7. 7 Servicio de Oftalmología HCSC, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria HCSC (IdISSC), Universidad Complutense, OFTARED, Madrid, Spain
  8. 8 Clínica Universidad de Navarra, Facultad de Medicina, OFTARED, Pamplona, Spain
  9. 9 Departamento de Oftalmología, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Murcia; Hospital General Universitario Reina Sofía, IMIB-Arrixaca, OFTARED, Murcia, Spain
Show affiliations +
Journal:
Archivos de la Sociedad Española de Oftalmologia

ISSN: 0365-6691

Year of publication: 2015

Volume: 90

Issue: 3

Pages: 119-138

Type: Article

DOI: 10.1016/J.OFTAL.2014.09.014 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR

More publications in: Archivos de la Sociedad Española de Oftalmologia

Abstract

Objective To present a clinical practice guideline update on the medical, laser, and surgical treatment of primary angle closure glaucoma (PACG) in adults. Methods Following the formulation of key questions using the PICO scheme (Patient/Problem, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome), a systematic review was performed on the literature published to date, including international clinical practice guidelines. The AMSTAR and Risk of Bias tools were used for evaluating the quality of the information. The level of evidence and grade of recommendation was established following the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) system. Results Following the above methodology, recommendations of medical, laser and surgical treatment in adult PACG and levels of evidence are presented. Conclusions Although the level of scientific evidence for many of the questions raised is not very high, a review is presented on updated treatment recommendations for adult PACG. Among the limitations for the implementation of these recommendations is that most studies have been conducted in Asian populations, and that the effectiveness is measured almost exclusively in terms of reducing intraocular pressure, and does not include visual function, quality of life or cost-effectiveness parameters.

Data source: Dialnet