Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27757733›Full record

Trial reportInternational ophthalmology2017

Comparison of two mineralcorticosteroids receptor antagonists for the treatment of central serous chorioretinopathy.

Francesco Pichi, Paola Carrai, Antonio Ciardella, Francine Behar-Cohen, Paolo Nucci, Central Serous Chorioretinopathy Study Group

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in International ophthalmology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Oral therapeutic interventions for central serous chorioretinopathy: A systematic review.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Interventions for central serous chorioretinopathy: a network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Comparing treatment outcomes in randomized controlled trials of central serous chorioretinopathy.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2023
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Francesco PichiCole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. ilmiticopicchio@gmail.com.
Paola CarraiSan Giuseppe Hospital, University Eye Clinic, Milan, Italy.
Antonio CiardellaOphthalmology Department, Sant'Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy.
Francine Behar-CohenDepartment of Ophthalmology, Jules-Gonin Eye Hospital, Fondation Asile des Aveugles, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Paolo NucciSan Giuseppe Hospital, University Eye Clinic, Milan, Italy.
Central Serous Chorioretinopathy Study Group
IRCCS Azienda Ospedliero-Universitaria di Bologna Policlinico di Sant'Orsola · ITOspedale San Giuseppe · ITCleveland Clinic · USFondation Asile des Aveugles · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the effect of oral spironolactone and eplerenone, two specific antagonists of the mineralocorticoid receptor, in central serous chorioretinopathy (CSCR).

methodsIn this prospective, placebo-controlled trial, sixty patients with persistent CSCR were assigned to three treatment group. Twenty patients in Group 1 were treated with 25 mg of spironolactone (Aldactone; Pfizer) for 1 week, then increased to 50 mg for the following 3 weeks, then shifted to eplerenone 50 mg for 1 month. Twenty patients in Group 2 were treated with 25 mg of eplerenone (Inspra; Pfizer) for 1 week, then increased to 50 mg for the following 3 weeks, and then shifted to spironolactone 50 mg for 1 month. Twenty patients in Group 3 were treated with 1 placebo control tablet for 1 week, then increased to two tablets for the following 3 weeks, and then shifted to spironolactone 50 mg for 1 month. At the end of the second month, all the treatments were stopped, and the patients were followed for two additional months. Primary outcome measure was a change in BCVA at 1, 2, and 4 months. Secondary outcome was a change of >20 % in the size of SRF recorded with OCT at 1, 2, and 4 months of treatment.

resultsIn terms of BCVA, treatment in Group 1 was effective from the first month (spironolactone, p value 0.01), and in Group 2 effective from the second month (shift to spironolactone, p value 0.004). Since the p value after the first month was 0.2 in Group 2, even with a larger sample, it would be difficult to see an efficacy of an eplerenone treatment after 1 month. As for the SRF, both in Group 1 and Group 2, both treatments were found to be equally effective after 1 month of administration (p values 0.004). At 4 months, only in Group 3, there was no statistical improvement of BCVA and SRF (p values 0.09 and 0.5).

conclusionsSpironolactone is statistically superior to eplerenone in improving BCVA of patients with CSCR, while both drugs can be considered equally effective in promoting the reabsorption of SRF.

Indexed as

Visual AcuityAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCentral Serous ChorioretinopathyDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug Administration ScheduleEplerenoneFemaleFluorescein AngiographyFollow-Up StudiesFundus OculiHumansIntravitreal InjectionsMaleMiddle AgedEplerenoneMineralocorticoid Receptor AntagonistsSpironolactoneCentral serous chorioretinopathyEplerenoneMineralocorticoidSpironolactone

Identifiers

PMID27757733
OpenAlexW2532785027

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.