ArticleMedical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal2017
Comparison of Intravitreal Bevacizumab and Intravitreal Diclofenac in the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema: a 6-month Follow-up.
Article in Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effects of intravitreal injections on intraocular pressure and retinal nerve fiber layer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2020Pooled it
- Review
- Intravitreal diclofenac versus intravitreal bevacizumab in persistent diabetic macular edema: Anatomical and functional outcome.Saudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological SocietyArticle
- Short-Term Effects of Adding Topical Ketorolac to Intravitreal Bevacizumab in Diabetic Macular Edema: A Crossover Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of ophthalmic & vision researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare the effect of intravitreal diclofenac, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), with that of bevacizumab, a well-known anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) drug, in the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME). Diclofenac was chosen in this study because it has both features of NSAIDs and corticosteroids by inhibiting the cyclooxygenase (COX) and lipoxygenase pathways, respectively. In this non-randomized comparative interventional case series, 64 eyes from 32 patients with bilateral naïve DME were selected and every eye was randomly assigned to intravitreal injection of bevacizumab (IVB) or diclofenac (IVD). After exclusion of some patients because of short follow-up duration or less than two intravitreal injections, finally, 52 eyes from 26 patients were analyzed. Of those, 26 eyes received 500 µg/0.1 mL IVD and 26 eyes received 1.25 mg IVB. After 6 months of follow-up, the results indicated that visual acuity was significantly improved from 0.50 ± 0.13 in IVB and 0.52 ± 0.12 LogMAR in IVD at baseline to 0.2 ± 0.1 and 0.29 ± 0.07, respectively. Central macular thickness (CMT) and macular volume were measured based on spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) at month 1, 3, and 6. Both groups showed a significant reduction in CMT and macular volume from baseline but there was no significant difference between the IVB and IVD groups. Interestingly, IVD, but not IVB, decreased intraocular pressure (IOP), which is a desirable effect. There was no serious complication due to injections. This study sheds light into the long-term effects of NSAIDs and may support the idea that inflammation suppression by NSAIDs may have the same results as anti-VEGF administration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29392145PMC5787025W3025629732What 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.