Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27195093›Full record

ArticleJournal of ophthalmic & vision research

Macula-Sparing Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment: Is Emergent Surgery Necessary?

Sasan Mahmoudi, Arghavan Almony

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ophthalmic & vision research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. When to repair a retinal detachment?International journal of ophthalmology · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Risk of progression in macula-on rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2017
    Observational
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sasan MahmoudiCarolina Eye Associates, Southern Pines, NC, USA.
Arghavan AlmonyCarolina Eye Associates, Southern Pines, NC, USA.
Southern Eye Associates · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The status of the macula is a significant factor in determining final visual outcomes in rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) and should be considered in the timing of surgical repair. Several studies have shown that macula-involving RRDs attain similar visual and anatomic outcomes when surgery is performed within seven days as compared to emergent surgery (within 24 hours). In contrast, surgery prior to macular detachment in macula-sparing RRDs generally yields the best visual outcomes. In the case of macula-sparing RRDs, it is not clear how long the macula may remain attached, therefore, standard practice dictates emergent surgery. Timing of presentation, examination findings, case complexity, co-existing medical conditions, surgeon expertise, and timing and quality of access to operating facilities and staff, however, should all be considered in determining whether a macula-sparing RRD requires immediate intervention or if equivalent visual and possibly better overall outcomes can be achieved with scheduled surgery within an appropriate time frame.

Indexed as

Emergency SurgeryFovea-SparingMacula-onMacula-Sparing Rhegmatogenous Retinal DetachmentRhegmatogenous Retinal DetachmentTime-to-Surgery

Identifiers

PMID27195093
PMCPMC4860974
OpenAlexW2339035804

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.