ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2014
Intravitreal vascular endothelial growth factor.
Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2014. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vascular endothelial growth factor levels in tears of patients with retinal vein occlusion.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2015Article
- [Intravitreal fibrinolysis and retinal vein occlusion].Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft · 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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate whether a specific pre-analytical stabilization regimen is needed for naïve vitreous taps to detect true values of intrinsic VEGF levels.
methodsFourteen consecutive patients with different vitreomacular pathologies without blood-retina-barrier breakdown were scheduled for standard 23-gauge three-port pars plana vitrectomy, and naïve vitreous taps were sampled at the beginning of each procedure. The extracted vitreous specimen was split; one half was immediately stored in a -20 °C freezer (unstabilized samples) and the other half was instantly stabilized with albumin (2.5 % final conc.), followed by arginine stabilization (1.25 M final conc.) and consecutively stored in a -20 °C freezer (stabilized samples).
resultsIntravitreal VEGF was detected in all 14 analyzed samples (100 %). VEGF levels were shown to be 46.5 pg/ml ± 62.3 pg/ml (MV ± SD; range: 5.99-232.3 pg/ml) in unstabilized, and 120.4 pg/ml ± 94.4 pg/ml (range: 42.9 pg/ml-289.6 pg/ml) in stabilized vitreous samples. Intravitreal VEGF levels in stabilized vitreous samples were on average 2.6-fold, and thus significantly higher than in unstabilized taps of same eyes (p = 0.001, Wilcoxon test). VEGF levels in stabilized vitreous samples can be up to 8.5 times higher than in corresponding unstabilized vitreous taps of same eyes (bootstrap analysis). Intravitreal VEGF levels in unstabilized samples correlate with those in stabilized vitreous taps (r = 0.594; p = 0.025; Pearson).
conclusionsAn adequate pre-analytic stabilization regimen is needed to evaluate the most accurate intravitreal VEGF levels. This in turn will result in a better understanding of the physiological as well as pathological role of VEGF within the eye. Furthermore, knowing the true value of intravitreal VEGF levels will help to calculate the dosage of intravitrealy applied anti-VEGF drugs.
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.