Characteristics of excluded studies
| Reason for exclusion | Refractory glaucoma: RCT of 60 eyes with refractory glaucoma treated with contact versus non-contact diode transscleral cyclophotocoagulation |
| Reason for exclusion | Case series: 18 eyes with neovascular glaucoma treated with contact diode transscleral cyclophotocoagulation |
| Reason for exclusion | Cohort study: 21 eyes with neovascular glaucoma treated with diode transscleral cyclophotocoagulation with laser on the ciliary body only; compared to a cohort of 21 eyes treated with diode transscleral cyclophotocoagulation with ablation of periphery retina |
| Reason for exclusion | Case series: 21 eyes with refractory glaucoma treated with continuous wave Nd:YAG cyclophotocoagulation using an artificial sapphire crystal contact probe |
| Reason for exclusion | Refractory glaucoma: RCT of 48 eyes with refractory glaucoma treated with micropulse versus continuous wave diode transscleral cyclophotocoagulation |
| Reason for exclusion | Cohort study: 626 eyes with cataract and medically-controlled glaucoma treated with phacoemulsification plus endoscopic cyclophotocoagulation; compared to a cohort of 81 eyes treated with phacoemulsification alone (conference abstract only, no full-length report) |
| Reason for exclusion | Refractory glaucoma: RCT of 31 eyes with intractable glaucoma treated with Nd:YAG cyclophotocoagulation versus cyclocryotherapy (conference abstract only, no full-length report) |
| Reason for exclusion | Case series: 10 eyes with neovascular glaucoma treated with semiconductor contact diode transscleral cyclophotocoagulation |
| Reason for exclusion | Case series: 36 eyes with neovascular glaucoma treated with Nd:YAG transscleral cyclophotocoagulation or pneumatically stented pars plana Baerveldt implants (conference abstract only, no full-length report) |
| Reason for exclusion | Case series: 54 eyes with neovascular glaucoma treated with Nd:YAG transscleral cyclophotocoagulation, endocyclophotocoagulation, or pars plana Baerveldt implants (conference abstract only, no full-length report) |
| Reason for exclusion | Cohort study: 7 eyes with refractory glaucoma treated with diode transscleral cyclophotocoagulation at 1.2 W for 3.5 seconds (4.25 J); compared to a cohort of 7 eyes treated with diode transscleral cyclophotocoagulation at 2.8 W for 1.5 seconds (4.25 J) |
| Reason for exclusion | Refractory glaucoma: RCT of 40 eyes with refractory glaucoma treated with noncontact Nd:YAG transscleral cyclophotocoagulation applied 1.5 versus 3.0 millimeters posterior to the comeoscleral limbus |
| iReason for exclusion | Letter to editor: discussion of diode versus Nd:YAG lasers for cyclophotocoagulation |
| Reason for exclusion | Case series: 21 eyes with refractory glaucoma treated with diode transscleral cyclophotocoagulation |
| Reason for exclusion | Cohort study: 32 eyes with refractory glaucoma treated with diode transscleral cyclophotocoagulation; compared to a cohort of 38 eyes treated with cyclocryotherapy |
| Reason for exclusion | Cohort study: 28 eyes with cataract and glaucoma treated with phacoemulsification plus cyclophotocoagulation; compared to a cohort of 28 eyes treated with phacoemulsification alone |
| Reason for exclusion | Cohort study: 22 eyes with diabetic neovascular glaucoma treated with diode transscleral cyclophotocoagulation; compared to a cohort of 16 eyes treated with cyclocryotherapy |
| Reason for exclusion | Cohort study: 29 eyes of children with secondary glaucoma treated with diode transscleral cyclophotocoagulation; compared to a cohort of 40 eyes treated with cyclocryotherapy |
| Reason for exclusion | Refractory glaucoma: RCT of 26 eyes with refractory glaucoma treated with cyclophotocoagulation versus cyclocryotherapy (conference abstract only, no full-length report) |
| Reason for exclusion | Refractory glaucoma: RCT of 72 eyes with refractory glaucoma treated with diode transscleral cyclophotocoagulation versus cyclocryotherapy |
| Reason for exclusion | Refractory glaucoma: RCT of 45 eyes with refractory glaucoma treated with 180 ° versus 360 ° Nd:YAG transscleral cyclophotocoagulation (conference abstract only, no full-length report) |
| Reason for exclusion | Refractory glaucoma: RCT of 22 eyes with uncontrolled glaucoma treated with 7 W versus 9 W Nd:YAG transscleral cyclophotocoagulation (conference abstract only, no full-length report) |
| Reason for exclusion | Case series: 14 eyes with refractory glaucoma treated with diode transscleral cyclophotocoagulation |
| Reason for exclusion | Refractory glaucoma: RCT of 89 eyes with intractable glaucoma treated with 4 J versus 8 J noncontact Nd:YAG transscleral cyclophotocoagulation |
| Reason for exclusion | Refractory glaucoma: RCT of 30 eyes with end-stage glaucoma treated with half-versus full-dose diode transscleral cyclophotocoagulation |
| Reason for exclusion | Refractory glaucoma: RCT of 66 eyes with neovascular glaucoma treated with contact diode transscleral cyclophotocoagulation versus Ahmed glaucoma valve implant |
| Reason for exclusion | Cohort study: 25 eyes with neovascular glaucoma treated with transscleral cyclophotocoagulation; compared to a cohort of 18 eyes treated with cyclocryotherapy |
Footnotes
J: joule
Nd:YAG: neodymium:yttrium-alluminum-garnet
RCT: randomized controlled trial
W: watts