ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2013
Optimising assessment intervals improves visual outcomes in ranibizumab-treated age-related neovascular degeneration: using the stability phase as a benchmark.
Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Refractory subretinal fluid in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration treated with intravitreal ranibizumab: visual acuity outcome.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2015Article
- Two-year outcome of an observe-and-plan regimen for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: how to alleviate the clinical burden with maintained functional results.Eye (London, England) · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo observe visual acuity change in the stability phase when follow-up intervals are decreased in ranibizumab-treated neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nvAMD).
methodsSelection of patients was based on a review of a cohort of 189 eyes of 154 patients with nvAMD treated with intravitreal ranibizumab in routine clinical practice. Patients were transferred from a base hospital with a 8-week follow-up interval to a community eye clinic, enabling a new follow-up interval of 4 weeks. Staff, assessment, and treatment protocols were equivalent in the two centres. Patients were included when they were in the stability phase of treatment defined 1 month after having completed their three initiation treatments with ranibizumab. Each patient was required to have attended at least a further 12 visits; this means a follow-up time for a year or longer, consisting of six visits at the base hospital followed by six visits at the new eye clinic. The best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), follow-up intervals and injection numbers were collected.
resultsSeventy-two eyes of 62 patients were included. The mean follow-up interval for the six visits in the base hospital was 56.81 days, and in the new eye centre 31.81 days. The BCVA loss in the base hospital was -1.13 letters, compared to a gain of +4.61 letters in the community eye clinic over the six visits. The number of ranibizumab injections was 3.67 in the base hospital, compared with 3.91 in the other centre over the respective periods.
conclusionVisual acuity improves and severe visual loss decreases when follow-up intervals reduce from approximately 8 weeks to 4 weeks. Furthermore, using the stability phase to evaluate the outcome and effectiveness of our treatments for age-related macular degeneration appeared to be an efficient tool.
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.