ArticleJournal of medical ultrasonics (2001)2017
Is the unaffected eye really unaffected? Color Doppler ultrasound findings in unilaterally active central serous chorioretinopathy.
Article in Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measurement of Retrobulbar Blood Flow and Vascular Reactivity-Relevance for Ocular and Cardiovascular Diseases.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Evaluation of parafoveal vascular density using optical coherence tomography angiography in patients with central serous chorioretinopathy.Lasers in medical science · 2022Article
- Three-dimensional choroidal vascularity index in central serous chorioretinopathy using ultra-widefield swept-source optical coherence tomography angiography.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Nailfold Videocapillaroscopy in Patients with Central Serous Chorioretinopathy and Its Relationship to Morphological and Functional Findings.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- The effect of bariatric surgery on the retrobulbar flow hemodynamic parameters in patients with obesity: color Doppler evaluation.International ophthalmology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate ocular hemodynamic changes using color Doppler ultrasonography imaging (CDI) with an emphasis on unaffected eyes of patients with central serous chorioretinopathy (CSC).
methodsTwenty-seven patients with active CSC and 25 controls were analyzed using spectral domain-optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) and CDI for choroidal imaging and evaluation of retrobulbar vessels, respectively.
resultsResistive index (RI), pulsatility index (PI), and peak systolic velocity (PSV) of the ophthalmic artery (OA) and PSV, end-diastolic velocity (EDV), and mean velocity (Vmean) of the central retinal artery (CRA) in the patient group were less than those in the control group. RI and PI of the CRA were greater in the patient group compared to the control group. RI, PI, PSV, and Vmean of the OA and PSV, EDV, and Vmean of the CRA in the patients' unaffected eyes were less than those in the control group. OCT measurements of central choroidal thickness (CCT) of the affected eyes in the patient group were significantly greater than those of the unaffected eyes in the patient and control groups; that of the unaffected eyes was greater than that in the control group.
conclusionsHemodynamic changes in OA reflect choroidal hyperperfusion. Hemodynamic and OCT changes in the unaffected eyes of the patient group suggest CSC as a bilateral disorder and the systemic nature of the disease. Further investigations may aid in the evaluation of treatment response and the follow-up of disease, providing a new insight into management strategies.
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.