Trial reportThe British journal of ophthalmology2005
"Light" versus "classic" laser treatment for clinically significant diabetic macular oedema.
Trial report in The British journal of ophthalmology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Monotherapy laser photocoagulation for diabetic macular oedema.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Diabetic retinopathy (treatment).BMJ clinical evidence · 2011Pooled it
- Diabetic retinopathy.BMJ clinical evidence · 2007Pooled it
- Association of Retinal Thickness at Month 1 Postrandomization With Later Thickness and Visual Acuity in Central Vein Occlusion.American journal of ophthalmology · 2024Trial
- SCORE2 Report 24: Nonlinear Relationship of Retinal Thickness and Visual Acuity in Central Retinal and Hemiretinal Vein Occlusion.Ophthalmology · 2023Trial
- SCORE Study report 1: baseline associations between central retinal thickness and visual acuity in patients with retinal vein occlusion.Ophthalmology · 2009Trial
- Relationship between optical coherence tomography-measured central retinal thickness and visual acuity in diabetic macular edema.Ophthalmology · 2007Trial
- Association of fluorescein angiographic features with visual acuity and with optical coherence tomographic and stereoscopic color fundus photographic features of diabetic macular edema in a randomized clinical trial.Retina (Philadelphia, Pa.)Trial
- Review
- Relationship between Outer Retinal Layers Thickness and Visual Acuity in Diabetic Macular Edema.BioMed research international · 2015Article
- Optical coherence tomographic and visual results at six months after transitioning to aflibercept for patients on prior ranibizumab or bevacizumab treatment for exudative age-related macular degeneration (an American Ophthalmological Society thesis).Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society · 2014Article
- Subthreshold diode-laser micropulse photocoagulation as a primary and secondary line of treatment in management of diabetic macular edema.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2014Article
- Relationship between optical coherence tomography retinal parameters and visual acuity in diabetic macular edema.Ophthalmology · 2010Article
- Relationship between photoreceptor outer segment length and visual acuity in diabetic macular edema.Retina (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2010Article
- Quantitative subanalysis of cystoid spaces and outer nuclear layer using optical coherence tomography in age-related macular degeneration.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2009Article
- Optical coherence tomography measurements and analysis methods in optical coherence tomography studies of diabetic macular edema.Ophthalmology · 2008Article
- Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Practice Guidelines: Customized for Iranian Population.Journal of ophthalmic & vision researchArticle
- Subthreshold micropulse laser adjuvant to bevacizumab versus bevacizumab monotherapy in treating diabetic macular edema: one- year- follow-up.Therapeutic advances in ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare the effectiveness of "light" versus "classic" laser photocoagulation in diabetic patients with clinically significant macular oedema (CSMO).
methodsA prospective randomised pilot clinical trial in which 29 eyes of 24 diabetic patients with mild to moderate non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) and CSMO were randomised to either "classic" or "light" Nd:YAG 532 nm (frequency doubled) green laser. "Light" laser treatment differed from conventional ("classic") photocoagulation in that the energy employed was the lowest capable to produce barely visible burns at the level of the retinal pigment epithelium. Primary outcome measure was the change in foveal retinal thickness as measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT); secondary outcomes were the reduction/elimination of macular oedema on contact lens biomicroscopy and fluorescein angiography, change in visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and mean deviation in the central 10 degrees visual field. Examiners were masked to patients' treatment.
results14 eyes were assigned to "classic" and 15 were assigned to "light" laser treatment. At 12 months, seven (50%) of 14 eyes treated with "classic" and six (43%) of 14 eyes treated with "light" laser had a decrease of foveal retinal thickness on OCT (p = 0.79). A comparison of reduction/elimination of oedema, visual improvement, visual loss, change in contrast sensitivity, and mean deviation in the central 10 degrees showed no statistical difference between the groups at 12 months (p>0.05 for all groups).
conclusionsThis study suggests that "light" photocoagulation for CSMO may be as effective as "classic" laser treatment, thus supporting the rationale for a larger equivalence trial.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.