ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2016
Macular laser photocoagulation with or without intravitreal triamcinolone pretreatment for diabetic macular edema: a result from five randomized controlled trials.
Article in International journal of ophthalmology, 2016. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficiency and safety of laser photocoagulation with or without intravitreal ranibizumab for treatment of diabetic macular edema: a systematic review and Meta-analysis.International journal of ophthalmology · 2017Article
- Effect of focal laser photocoagulation in eyes with mild to moderate non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy.International journal of ophthalmology · 2016Article
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
aimTo assess possible benefits of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) injection as pretreatment for macular laser photocoagulation (MLP) in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME).
methodsPublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs) concerning MLP with or without IVTA pretreatment for DME were retrieved from databases CNKI, Medline, EMbase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. A Meta-analysis on eligible studies was conducted using RevMan 5.0 software. Two investigators independently assessed the quality of the trials and extracted data. Main outcome measures included the change in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), difference in central macular thickness (CMT) and adverse events reporting in particular elevated intraocular pressure within the follow-up period. The results were pooled using weight mean difference (WMD) or odds risk (OR) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). A fixed- or random-effect model was employed depending on the heterogeneity of the inclusion trials.
resultsFinally, five independent RCTs were identified and used for comparing MLP with IVTA pretreatment (131 eyes) with MLP alone (133 eyes, control group). The overall study quality was relatively higher according to the modified Jadad scale. The Meta-analysis showed that MLP with IVTA pretreatment significantly reduced CMT at one, three and six months (P=0.002, 0.0003 and 0.04, respectively), compared with MLP alone. The IVTA pretreatment group showed statistically significant improvements in BCVA at the one-month follow up as compared with the control group (P=0.03). At three- and six-month follow up, there was a beneficial trend towards improving visual acuity in the IVTA pretreatment group without statistical significance between groups (P=0.06 and 0.20, respectively). The incidence of elevation of intraocular pressure was significantly higher in the IVTA pretreatment group than in the control group (P<0.0001). No evidence of publication bias was present according to Begg's test and Egger's test. There was a low level of heterogeneity in the included studies.
conclusionThis Meta-analysis indicates that MLP with IVTA pretreatment has a better therapeutic effect in terms of CMT reduction and earlier (1mo) visual improvement for patients with DME as compared with MLP alone. Further confirmation with rigorously well-designed multi-center trials is needed.
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.