SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2008
Macular translocation for neovascular age-related macular degeneration.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The treatment methods for post-stroke visual impairment: A systematic review.Brain and behavior · 2017Pooled it
- Interventions for age-related visual problems in patients with stroke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- In situ regeneration of retinal pigment epithelium by gene transfer of E2F2: a potential strategy for treatment of macular degenerations.Gene therapy · 2017Article
- Interventions for Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Are Practice Guidelines Based on Systematic Reviews?Ophthalmology · 2016Article
- Aflibercept: a review of its use in the treatment of choroidal neovascularization due to age-related macular degeneration.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2015Review
- Stem cells in retinal regeneration: past, present and future.Development (Cambridge, England) · 2013Review
- What do Cochrane systematic reviews say about interventions for age-related macular degeneration?Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicinaReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMacular translocation has been proposed by vitreoretinal surgeons to displace the neuroretinal tissue onto healthy retinal pigment epithelium and choroid when the macula has been invaded by subretinal neovascularisation.
objectivesThis review aims at assessing the effectiveness of macular translocation for preserving or improving vision in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD). SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS). There were no language or date restrictions in the search for trials.The electronic databases were last searched on 21 July 2008. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised or quasi randomised controlled trials comparing macular translocation with any other treatment or observation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted the data. The risk ratio (RR) of visual loss and visual gain was estimated at one year after treatment. MAIN
resultsOnly one small unblinded study on 50 people compared full macular translocation with photodynamic therapy (PDT) in AMD patients with predominantly classic subfoveal choroidal neovascularisation (CNV). At the last examination, performed in most of the cases after one year, there was no difference in the rate of visual loss of 3 or more lines (translocation versus PDT: RR 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22 to 1.43), as well as in the mean change of contrast sensitivity (1 letter favouring translocation; 95% CI -3.51 to 5.51) and the rate of recurrence of CNV (translocation versus PDT: RR 1.56, 95% CI 0.83 to 2.91). Other outcomes significantly favoured translocation, such as the gain of 3 or more ETDRS lines (RR 21, 95% CI 1.30 to 340.02), the mean change of visual acuity (mean difference (MD) 14.60, 95% CI 5.39 to 23.81) and the mean change of near visual acuity score (MD 17.80, 95% CI 3.98 to 31.62) which is obtained with an algorithm. Serious complications reported after macular translocation were retinal detachment in 6/25 patients and diplopia requiring prismatic correction in 5/25 patients. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThere is insufficient evidence from randomised controlled trials on the effectiveness of macular translocation, which is also not free of important risks. Furthermore, this technique is difficult to perform and a long surgical training is required. Future studies might include patients with small neovascular lesions that failed to respond to current pharmacological therapies and are willing to accept the risks associated with surgery to try to improve visual acuity.
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.