ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2019
Clinical characteristics of glaucoma patients with disc hemorrhage in different locations.
Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Artifacts in Macular and Peripapillary OCT Angiography in Patients with Different Severities of Glaucoma.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Characteristics of optic disc hemorrhage and optic nerve changes following acute primary angle closure.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Association between Glaucoma Progression in Macular Ganglion Cell Complex and Disc Hemorrhage: Differences between Superior and Inferior Hemiretinas.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Characteristics of Central Visual Field Progression in Eyes with Optic Disc Hemorrhage.American journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Central visual field in glaucoma: An updated review.Taiwan journal of ophthalmologyReview
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
purposeTo compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes of eyes with unilateral disc hemorrhage (DH) in different locations.
methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study. DHs were classified by locations: the superior, superotemporal, inferotemporal, or inferior sectors of optic disc were classified as the susceptible area, while other sectors were defined as the less susceptible area. Structural and functional outcomes were analyzed by the Humphrey field analyzer and spectral domain optical coherence tomography.
resultsForty-three eyes with DHs in the susceptible area were less myopic and had more peripapillary-type DH, larger cup-to-disc ratio, cup volume, and disc area. Thirty-three eyes with DHs in the less susceptible area had less association with RNFL defects, greater tilted ratio, and less torsion of the disc. Follow-up revealed that the change in sectoral RNFL (μm) thickness was significantly greater for DHs in the susceptible area within one year (- 6.0 ± 14.0 vs. 0.7 ± 13.0, p = 0.035) and two years (- 10.0 ± 17.4 vs. - 1.1 ± 7.6, p = 0.012), while the change in average RNFL thickness was not different. Eyes with DHs in the susceptible area had faster MD deterioration (dB/year) than those in the less susceptible area within four years (- 0.32 ± 0.51 vs. - 0.05 ± 0.45, p = 0.047). A total of 16.9% of eyes, all in the susceptible area, had localized VF progression at DH corresponding area.
conclusionDisc hemorrhage in the superotemporal and inferotemporal regions had more subsequent structural and functional deterioration compared with the eyes with DHs in the temporal quadrant and nasal area.
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.