ReviewDer Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft2018
[Review of clinical trials in retinopathy of prematurity : Current state and future perspectives].
Review in Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Retinopathy of Prematurity: Incidence, Risk Factors, and Treatment Outcomes in a Tertiary Care Center.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- VEGFR1 signaling in retinal angiogenesis and microinflammation.Progress in retinal and eye research · 2021Review
- Bioactive lipids and pathological retinal angiogenesis.British journal of pharmacology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe treatment of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) has gained a new dynamic since the introduction of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy. This review summarizes clinical trial data in order to aid informed decision-making.
methodsIn this article, pivotal clinical trials are summarized and discussed with regard to their implications for ROP therapy.
resultsThe longest follow-up phase exists for children treated in the CRYO-ROP study, which used retinal cryocoagulation to treat ROP. Based on results of the ETROP study and others, retinal laser therapy has replaced cryotherapy as standard of care. For anti-VEGF treatment, three controlled clinical trials exist to date: BEAT-ROP, CARE-ROP, and the PEDIG study. Combined, these studies demonstrate efficacy of anti-VEGF in treating acute ROP. However, they also emphasize the risk of (late) recurrences and the largely unsolved questions regarding choice of drug and dose as well as long-term safety.
conclusionTreatment of ROP remains a highly individual decision in which many variables need to be considered. The data discussed in this article can help in decision-making and emphasize the unique characteristics of the available therapeutic approaches, in particular regarding postoperative follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29789899What 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.