Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29474306›Full record

ArticleRetina (Philadelphia, Pa.)2019

THREE-YEAR OUTCOMES IN A RANDOMIZED SINGLE-BLIND CONTROLLED TRIAL OF INTRAVITREAL RANIBIZUMAB AND ORAL SUPPLEMENTATION WITH DOCOSAHEXAENOIC ACID AND ANTIOXIDANTS FOR DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA.

María Lafuente, Lourdes Ortín, María Argente, José L Guindo, María D López-Bernal, Francisco J López-Román, Joan Carles Domingo, Jerónimo Lajara

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Retina (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

María LafuenteDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hospital Universitario Morales Meseguer, Murcia, Spain.
Lourdes OrtínDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hospital Universitario Morales Meseguer, Murcia, Spain.
María ArgenteDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hospital Universitario Morales Meseguer, Murcia, Spain.
José L GuindoDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hospital Universitario Morales Meseguer, Murcia, Spain.
María D López-BernalDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hospital Universitario Morales Meseguer, Murcia, Spain.
Francisco J López-RománFaculty of Health Sciences, San Antonio Catholic University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain.
Joan Carles DomingoDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Biology, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Jerónimo LajaraDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hospital Universitario Morales Meseguer, Murcia, Spain.
Hospital General Universitario Morales Meseguer · ESUniversidad Católica San Antonio de Murcia · ESUniversidad de Murcia · ESUniversitat de Barcelona · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo report 3-year results of a randomized single-blind controlled trial of intravitreal ranibizumab combined with oral docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) supplementation versus ranibizumab alone in patients with diabetic macular edema.

methodsThere were 26 patients (31 eyes) in the DHA group and 29 (38 eyes) in the control group. Ranibizumab (0.5 mg) was administered monthly for the first 4 months followed by a pro re nata (PRN) regimen. In the experimental group, patients received oral DHA supplementation (1,050 mg/day) (Brudyretina 1.5 g).

resultsAt 36 months, mean decrease of central subfield macular thickness was higher in the DHA-supplementation group than in controls (275 ± 50 μm vs. 310 ± 97 μm) with significant differences at Months 25, 30, 33, and 34. Between-group differences in best-corrected visual acuity were not found, but the percentages of ETRDS gains >5 and >10 letters were higher in the DHA-supplementation group. Differences serum HbA1c, plasma total antioxidant capacity values, erythrocyte DHA content, and serum IL-6 levels were all significant in favor of the DHA-supplementation group.

conclusionThe addition of a high-rich DHA dietary supplement to intravitreal ranibizumab was effective to achieve better sustained improvement of central subfield macular thickness outcomes after 3 years of follow-up as compared with intravitreal ranibizumab alone.

Indexed as

Visual AcuityAdministration, OralAgedAged, 80 and overAngiogenesis InhibitorsAntioxidantsDiabetic RetinopathyDocosahexaenoic AcidsDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIntravitreal InjectionsMacular EdemaMaleAngiogenesis InhibitorsAntioxidantsDocosahexaenoic AcidsRanibizumabVascular Endothelial Growth Factor A

Identifiers

PMID29474306
PMCPMC6553973
OpenAlexW2793245808

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.