ArticleBMC ophthalmology2017
A case of proliferative diabetic retinopathy in which scintillating particles appeared in the intravitreal cavity after laser photocoagulation.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diabetic Retinopathy: Clinical Features, Risk Factors, and Treatment Options.Current diabetes reviews · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo report a case of proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) exhibiting the appearance of scintillating particles presumed to be crystallin inside the intravitreal cavity after laser photocoagulation. CASE PRESENTATION: A 56-year-old male patient presented at our outpatient clinic after becoming aware of decreased vision in his right eye. Ocular examination performed at the patient's initial visit revealed a massive preretinal macular hemorrhage due to PDR in his right eye. Fundus fluorescein angiography revealed extensive retinal non-perfusion areas and neovascularization in both eyes. However, no opacity was observed in the intravitreal cavity of his left eye. Vitreous surgery was performed on the patient's right eye after ultrasonic phacoemulsification aspiration and intraocular lens implantation. Post surgery, the corrected VA in that eye improved from 0.1 to 1.0. In correlation with the treatment performed on the patient's right eye, we began panretinal photocoagulation on his left eye. Examination performed prior to the patient's third session of panretinal photocoagulation revealed a large number of scintillating particles in the posterior vitreous gel in front of the retina. Examination via slit-lamp microscopy revealed that the particles were of varied hues, and closely resembled a 'Christmas tree' cataract. No posterior vitreous detachment was observed, and since these particles were situated as if captured in the posterior vitreous gel, no eye-movement-associated mobility of the particles was observed. Since the cloudiness was not severe enough to interfere with photocoagulation, additional photocoagulation was performed, and the patient is currently under observation. Six months have now passed since the fourth photocoagulation procedure was performed, and there has been no change in the state of the particles. Optical coherence tomography imaging revealed no change before and after the panretinal photocoagulation. The corrected VA in his left eye has remained at 1.0 during the postoperative follow-up period.
conclusionsWe speculate that the production of crystallin in the retina in this case was triggered by the photocoagulation procedure performed for diabetic retinopathy.
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.