O impacto da cirurgia de catarata no tratamento do glaucoma primário de ângulo fechado: uma revisão sistemática

Autores

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55892/jrg.v9i20.3255

Palavras-chave:

Glaucoma de Ângulo Fechado, Extração de Catarata, Pressão Intraocular, Terapêutica, Oftalmologia

Resumo

O glaucoma primário de ângulo fechado (GPAF) é uma neuropatia óptica caracterizada pelo bloqueio da via de drenagem do humor aquoso, levando à elevação da pressão intraocular (PIO) e possível perda visual irreversível. O presente estudo trata-se de uma revisão sistemática da literatura cujo objetivo principal é avaliar o impacto da cirurgia de catarata (facoemulsificação) no tratamento e controle do GPAF. Foram selecionados 15 estudos em bases de dados como PubMed, Embase, SciELO, LILACS e Cochrane Library, englobando ensaios clínicos, estudos de coorte e meta-análises. Os resultados demonstraram que a facoemulsificação promove redução significativa da PIO e diminuição da necessidade de medicações antiglaucomatosas a longo prazo, além de proporcionar alterações anatômicas favoráveis, como o aprofundamento da câmara anterior e abertura do ângulo iridocorneano. Conclui-se que a cirurgia de catarata não se restringe à reabilitação visual, consolidando-se como uma intervenção terapêutica primária e eficaz no manejo do GPAF, devendo ser considerada de forma individualizada.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Referências

BAEK, S. U. et al. Effect of Phacoemulsification on Intraocular Pressure in Healthy Subjects and Glaucoma Patients. Journal of Korean Medical Science, v. 34, n. 6, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2019.34.e47.

AZUARA-BLANCO, A. et al. Effectiveness of early lens extraction for the treatment of primary angle-closure glaucoma (EAGLE): a randomised controlled trial. The Lancet, v. 388, n. 10052, p. 1389–1397, out. 2016.

DAY, A. C. et al. Clear lens extraction for the management of primary angle closure glaucoma: surgical technique and refractive outcomes in the EAGLE cohort. British Journal of Ophthalmology, v. 102, n. 12, p. 1658–1662, 16 fev. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-311447.

DIETZE, J.; BLAIR, K.; HAVENS, S. J. Glaucoma. Disponível em: <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK538217/>.

HE, M. et al. Laser peripheral iridotomy for the prevention of angle closure: a single-centre, randomised controlled trial. The Lancet, v. 393, n. 10181, p. 1609–1618, abr. 2019. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32607-2.

HSU, E.; DESAI, M. Glaucoma and Systemic Disease. Life (Basel, Switzerland), v. 13, n. 4, p. 1018, 15 abr. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/life13041018.

HUSAIN, R. et al. Efficacy of Phacoemulsification Alone vs Phacoemulsification With Goniosynechialysis in Patients With Primary Angle-Closure Disease. JAMA Ophthalmology, v. 137, n. 10, p. 1107, 1 out. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2019.2493.

JAVANBAKHT, M. et al. Early lens extraction with intraocular lens implantation for the treatment of primary angle closure glaucoma: an economic evaluation based on data from the EAGLE trial. BMJ Open, v. 7, n. 1, p. e013254, jan. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013254.

KADER, M. A. et al. Lowering of intraocular pressure after phacoemulsification in primary open-angle and angle-closure glaucoma: correlation with lens thickness. Indian Journal of Ophthalmology, v. 70, n. 2, p. 574–579, 27 jan. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_1538_21.

MICHELS, T. C.; IVAN, O. Glaucoma: Diagnosis and Management. American Family Physician, v. 107, n. 3, p. 253–262, 1 mar. 2023.

MITCHELL, W. G. et al. Predictors of long-term intraocular pressure control after lens extraction in primary angle closure glaucoma: results from the EAGLE trial. British Journal of Ophthalmology, p. bjophthalmol-2021-319765, 6 abr. 2022. DOI: http://dx.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2021-319765.

ONG, A. Y. et al. Lens extraction for chronic angle-closure glaucoma. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, v. 2021, n. 3, 24 mar. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD005555.pub3.

ONG, A. Y. et al. Lens extraction versus laser peripheral iridotomy for acute primary angle closure. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, v. 3, n. 3, p. CD015116, ago. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD015116.pub2.

Phacoemulsification versus combined phacotrabeculectomy in the treatment of primary angle-closure glaucoma with cataract: a Meta-analysis. International Journal of Ophthalmology, 18 abr. 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18240/ijo.2016.04.21.

POTOP, V. et al. The Mirror Theory: Parallels between Open Angle and Angle Closure Glaucoma. Life, v. 14, n. 9, p. 1154, 12 set. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/life14091154.

ROUSE, B.; LE, J. T.; GAZZARD, G. Iridotomy to slow progression of visual field loss in angle-closure glaucoma. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, v. 2023, n. 1, 9 jan. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012270.pub3.

SAEED SHOKOOHI-RAD et al. Phacoemulsification, visco-goniosynechialysis, and goniotomy in patients with primary angle-closure glaucoma: A comparative study. European Journal of Ophthalmology, v. 31, n. 1, p. 88–95, 3 out. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1120672119879331.

SHERMAN, T. et al. Comparing the Effectiveness of Phacoemulsification + Endoscopic Cyclophotocoagulation Laser versus Phacoemulsification Alone for the Treatment of Primary Open Angle Glaucoma in Patients with Cataract (CONCEPT): Study Methodology. Ophthalmology Glaucoma, v. 6, n. 5, p. 474–479, 15 mar. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ogla.2023.03.004.

SINGH, K. et al. Cataract surgery in the glaucoma patient. Middle East African Journal of Ophthalmology, v. 22, n. 1, p. 10, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-9233.148343.

SINGH, K.; AGGARWAL, H.; BHATTACHARYYA, M. Phacoemulsification in angle-closure glaucoma: A 360° evaluation. Indian Journal of Ophthalmology, v. 72, n. 9, p. 1275–1279, 20 maio 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/IJO.IJO_1701_23.

SIRISHA SENTHIL et al. Phacoemulsification versus Phacotrabeculectomy in Medically Controlled Primary Angle Closure Glaucoma with Cataract in an Indian Cohort: A randomized controlled trial. International Ophthalmology, v. 42, n. 1, p. 35–45, 9 ago. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-021-01997-6.

PAGE, M. J. et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, v. 372, n. 71, p. 1–9, 2021.

WAGNER, I. V.; STEWART, M. W.; DORAIRAJ, S. K. Updates on the Diagnosis and Management of Glaucoma. Mayo Clinic Proceedings: Innovations, Quality & Outcomes, v. 6, n. 6, p. 618–635, dez. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2022.09.007.

WANG, N.; JIA, S. Phacoemulsification with or without goniosynechialysis for angle-closure glaucoma: a global Meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials. [S.l.: s.n.], v. 12, n. 5, 18 maio 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18240/ijo.2019.05.20.

WANG, Y. et al. Differences and Similarities Between Primary Open Angle Glaucoma and Primary Angle-Closure Glaucoma. Eye and Brain, v. 16, p. 39–54, set. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/EB.S472920.

XIE, J.; LI, W.; HAN, B. The Treatment of Primary Angle-Closure Glaucoma with Cataract: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trails. PubMed Central, v. 12, n. 2, p. 675–689, 29 dez. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40123-022-00639-z.

YAN, C. et al. Effects of lens extraction versus laser peripheral iridotomy on anterior segment morphology in primary angle closure suspect. Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, v. 257, n. 7, p. 1473–1480, 11 maio 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-019-04353-8.

ZHANG, C. et al. Comparison of the Stability of Two Intraocular Lenses in Primary Angle-Closure Glaucoma after Phacoemulsification. Journal of Ophthalmology, v. 2020, p. 1–5, 16 nov. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/9284245

Downloads

Publicado

2026-05-05

Como Citar

SILVA, V. L. F. de D. e; MENDONÇA, C. de Q. O impacto da cirurgia de catarata no tratamento do glaucoma primário de ângulo fechado: uma revisão sistemática. Revista JRG de Estudos Acadêmicos , Brasil, São Paulo, v. 9, n. 20, p. e093255, 2026. DOI: 10.55892/jrg.v9i20.3255. Disponível em: https://mail.revistajrg.com/index.php/jrg/article/view/3255. Acesso em: 13 maio. 2026.

ARK