ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2017
Combined therapy versus anti-vascular endothelial growth factor monotherapy for polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy: a Meta-analysis.
Article in International journal of ophthalmology, 2017. 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.
- The Past, Present, and Future Perspective of Photodynamic Therapy for Age-Related Macular Degeneration.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Cost-Utility Analysis of Drug Treatments in Patients with Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy in Thailand.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) combined with photodynamic therapy (PDT) versus anti-VEGF monotherapy for polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV).
methodsWe conducted a Meta-analysis of 9 studies to compare the efficacy and safety between combined therapy and anti-VEGF monotherapy for PCV. The programs of RevMan 5.3 and Stata 12.0 were used to analyze data.
resultsThe best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in combined therapy group were significantly better than those of anti-VEGF monotherapy group at 6, 24 and 36mo, with pooled weighted means differences (WMDs) of 0.12 (0.06, 0.18), 0.25 (0.12, 0.38) and 0.28 (0.13, 0.43), respectively. The central retinal thickness (CRT) reductions in combined therapy group were higher than that in anti-VEGF monotherapy group at 1, 3, 6 and 9mo, with pooled WMDs of 63.90 (20.41, 107.38), 33.47 (4.69, 62.24), 30.57 (0.12, 60.01) and 28.00 (2.51, 53.49), respectively. The regression rate of polyps in combined therapy group was much higher than that in anti-VEGF monotherapy group [RD: 0.47 (0.26, 0.68);
conclusionOur findings clearly document that anti-VEGF combined with PDT is a more effective therapy for PCV compared with anti-VEGF monotherapy. Furthermore, combined therapy does not increase the incidence of retinal hemorrhage.
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.