ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2015
Comparison of intravitreal bevacizumab with intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide for treatment of cystoid macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion: a Meta-analysis.
Article in International journal of ophthalmology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intravitreal dexamethasone implants versus intravitreal anti-VEGF treatment in treating patients with retinal vein occlusion: a meta-analysis.BMC ophthalmology · 2019Pooled it
- Intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF agents and antibiotic prophylaxis for endophthalmitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2017Pooled it
- Hypochlorous acid antiseptic washout improves patient comfort after intravitreal injection: A patient reported outcomes study.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2020Article
- Comparison between intravitreal bevacizumab and posterior sub-tenon injection of triamcinolone acetonide in macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2018Article
- New Developments in the Classification, Pathogenesis, Risk Factors, Natural History, and Treatment of Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion.Journal of ophthalmology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare the effects of intravitreal injection of bevacizumab (IVB) with intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) on the treatment of cystoid macular edema (CME) secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO).
methodsA literature search was conducted using PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science and the Chinese Biomedical Database. The comparison was divided into two groups, group 1 conducted comparison in branch RVO (BRVO) or central RVO (CRVO), group 2 conducted comparison in ischemic-RVO or nonischemic-RVO. Pooled mean differences (MDs) for changes in visual acuity (VA), central macular thickness (CMT) and intraocular pressure (IOP) were calculated in groups at 4, 12 and 24wk after treatment respectively.
resultsEight studies comparing the efficacy of IVB with IVTA were included in the Meta-analysis. In group 1, in BRVO, significant difference was shown on the comparison of CMT at 24wk (MD, -45.66; 95% CI, -76.03 to -15.28; P=0.003), IVB was effective on BRVO for at least 24wk; no significant differences were found in the comparison of VA at each time points (P>0.05 respectively). In CRVO, no significant differences were found in the comparison of VA or CMT between IVB and IVTA at each time points (P>0.05, respectively). In group 2, in ischemic-RVO, significant differences were shown in the comparison of VA (MD, -0.28; 95% CI, -0.42 to -0.14; P<0.0001) and CMT (MD, -86.50; 95% CI, -151.18 to -22.43; P=0.008) at 24wk; In nonischemic-RVO, no significant differences were demonstrated in the comparison of VA or CMT between IVB and IVTA at each time points (P>0.05, respectively). The occurrence of high IOP was much lower in IVB group.
conclusionThis Meta-analysis suggested that IVB was effective in decreasing CMT in BRVO for at least 24wk, IVB is more effective on improving VA and reducing CMT in ischemic-RVO. IVB is more promising on RVO than IVTA.
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.