ArticlePloS one2017
A novel in vivo model of puncture-induced iris neovascularization.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Construction and Validation of a Long-Term Visual Prognosis Prediction Model for Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy After Vitrectomy Based on Machine Learning.Endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism · 2026Article
- Conbercept Treatment for Heart-Shaped Vascular Intertwined Nets in Macular Neovascularization: Anti-VEGF Drug Therapy Strategy Based on Vascular Geometry Diagnosed by OCTA.Clinical case reports · 2025Article
- Gaining insight on mitigation of rubeosis iridis by UPARANT in a mouse model associated with proliferative retinopathy.Journal of molecular medicine (Berlin, Germany) · 2020Article
- UPARANT is an effective antiangiogenic agent in a mouse model of rubeosis iridis.Journal of molecular medicine (Berlin, Germany) · 2019Article
- Review
- Puncture-Induced Iris Neovascularization as a Mouse Model of Rubeosis Iridis.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess iris neovascularization by uveal puncture of the mouse eye and determine the role of angiogenic factors during iris neovascularization.
methodsUveal punctures were performed on BalbC mouse eyes to induce iris angiogenesis. VEGF-blockage was used as an anti-angiogenic treatment, while normoxia- and hypoxia-conditioned media from retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) cells was used as an angiogenic-inducer in this model. Iris vasculature was determined in vivo by noninvasive methods. Iris blood vessels were stained for platelet endothelial cell adhesion molecule-1 and vascular sprouts were counted as markers of angiogenesis. Expression of angiogenic and inflammatory factors in the puncture-induced model were determined by qPCR and western blot.
resultsPunctures led to increased neovascularization and sprouting of the iris. qPCR and protein analysis showed an increase of angiogenic factors, particularly in the plasminogen-activating receptor and inflammatory systems. VEGF-blockage partly reduced iris neovascularization, and treatment with hypoxia-conditioned RPE medium led to a statistically significant increase in iris neovascularization.
conclusionsThis study presents the first evidence of a puncture-induced iris angiogenesis model in the mouse. In a broader context, this novel in vivo model of neovascularization has the potential for noninvasive evaluation of angiogenesis modulating substances.
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.