ArticleBMJ open2013
Current treatments in diabetic macular oedema: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 9 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
47 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 122 citations in OpenAlex.
- Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment for retinal conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2019Pooled it
- Action on diabetic macular oedema: achieving optimal patient management in treating visual impairment due to diabetic eye disease.Eye (London, England) · 2017Guideline
- The Prevention and Treatment of Retinal Complications in Diabetes.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2016Guideline
- The Efficacy and Safety of Current Treatments in Diabetic Macular Edema: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.PloS one · 2016Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Systematic review and mixed treatment comparison of intravitreal aflibercept with other therapies for diabetic macular edema (DME).BMC ophthalmology · 2015Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Treatments for macular oedema following central retinal vein occlusion: systematic review.BMJ open · 2014Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Aflibercept with adjuvant micropulsed yellow laser versus aflibercept monotherapy in diabetic macular edema.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2019Trial
- Therapeutic Outcomes of Anti-VEGF Agents Versus Corticosteroids in Diabetic Macular Edema: A Comparative Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- The Calcium Signalling Profile of the Inner Blood-Retinal Barrier in Diabetic Retinopathy.Cells · 2025Review
- Diabetic retinopathy: A review on its pathophysiology and novel treatment modalities.World journal of methodology · 2024Review
- Diabetic Macular Edema Management: A Review of Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) Therapies.Cureus · 2024Review
- Diabetes more than retinopathy, it's effect on the anterior segment of eye.World journal of clinical cases · 2023Review
- Diagnostic circulating biomarkers to detect vision-threatening diabetic retinopathy: Potential screening tool of the future?Acta ophthalmologica · 2022Review
- LRG1: an emerging player in disease pathogenesis.Journal of biomedical science · 2022Review
- IL-17A Damages the Blood-Retinal Barrier through Activating the Janus Kinase 1 Pathway.Biomedicines · 2021Article
- Polymer-free corticosteroid dimer implants for controlled and sustained drug delivery.Nature communications · 2021Article
- AMP-activated protein kinase is a key regulator of acute neurovascular permeability.Journal of cell science · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this systematic review is to appraise the evidence for the use of anti-VEGF drugs and steroids in diabetic macular oedema (DMO) as assessed by change in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness and adverse events DATA SOURCE: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science with Conference Proceedings and the Cochrane Library (inception to July 2012). Certain conference abstracts and drug regulatory web sites were also searched. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS AND
interventionsRandomised controlled trials were used to assess clinical effectiveness and observational trials were used for safety. Trials which assessed triamcinolone, dexamethasone, fluocinolone, bevacizumab, ranibizumab, pegaptanib or aflibercept in patients with DMO were included. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS
methodsRisk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Study results are narratively described and, where appropriate, data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis.
resultsAnti-VEGF drugs are effective compared to both laser and placebo and seem to be more effective than steroids in improving BCVA. They have been shown to be safe in the short term but require frequent injections. Studies assessing steroids (triamcinolone, dexamethasone and fluocinolone) have reported mixed results when compared with laser or placebo. Steroids have been associated with increased incidence of cataracts and intraocular pressure rise but require fewer injections, especially when steroid implants are used. LIMITATIONS: The quality of included studies varied considerably. Five of 14 meta-analyses had moderate or high statistical heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY
findingsThe anti-VEGFs ranibizumab and bevacizumab have consistently shown good clinical effectiveness without major unwanted side effects. Steroid results have been mixed and are usually associated with cataract formation and intraocular pressure increase. Despite the current wider spectrum of treatments for DMO, only a small proportion of patients recover good vision (≥20/40), and thus the search for new therapies needs to continue.
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.