Frontiers in neurology · 2026
Migraine and the risk of glaucoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lu Sibiao, Ye Xiaojing, Chen Sitong, Zhang Jisheng, Sun Tianyi, Lin Xianming
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Migraine and glaucoma are prevalent and burdensome conditions worldwide, yet the evidence linking them remains inconsistent. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize available evidence on their association and investigate sources of heterogeneity.
METHODS: We comprehensively searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception to April 8, 2026, for cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies examining the migraine-glaucoma link. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models. Heterogeneity was explored via subgroup, sensitivity, and meta-regression analyses. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality checklist. Publication bias was evaluated via funnel plots, Egger's test, and trim-and-fill analysis.
RESULTS: Nineteen studies involving 3,625,071 participants were incorporated. The pooled analysis demonstrated a significant positive association between migraine and glaucoma risk (OR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.20-1.37), with moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 46.2%). Subgroup analyses indicated stronger associations in studies from America, clinic-based settings, those using self-reported migraine diagnosis and those with higher female participant proportions (≥60%). Egger's test suggested potential publication bias. Following trim-and-fill adjustment (imputing eight potentially missing studies), the pooled estimate remained significant though slightly attenuated (OR = 1.23, 95% CI: 1.13-1.34).
CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggests migraine is associated with a significantly increased risk of glaucoma. While the association persisted directionally after adjusting for potential publication bias, its magnitude varied by data source, diagnostic method, and population characteristics. Further high-quality prospective studies employing standardized criteria are needed to elucidate causality and underlying mechanisms.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420261367870, CRD420261367870.
METHODS: We comprehensively searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception to April 8, 2026, for cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies examining the migraine-glaucoma link. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models. Heterogeneity was explored via subgroup, sensitivity, and meta-regression analyses. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality checklist. Publication bias was evaluated via funnel plots, Egger's test, and trim-and-fill analysis.
RESULTS: Nineteen studies involving 3,625,071 participants were incorporated. The pooled analysis demonstrated a significant positive association between migraine and glaucoma risk (OR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.20-1.37), with moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 46.2%). Subgroup analyses indicated stronger associations in studies from America, clinic-based settings, those using self-reported migraine diagnosis and those with higher female participant proportions (≥60%). Egger's test suggested potential publication bias. Following trim-and-fill adjustment (imputing eight potentially missing studies), the pooled estimate remained significant though slightly attenuated (OR = 1.23, 95% CI: 1.13-1.34).
CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggests migraine is associated with a significantly increased risk of glaucoma. While the association persisted directionally after adjusting for potential publication bias, its magnitude varied by data source, diagnostic method, and population characteristics. Further high-quality prospective studies employing standardized criteria are needed to elucidate causality and underlying mechanisms.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420261367870, CRD420261367870.