ArticleDer Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft2020
[Ranibizumab and aflibercept for diabetic macular edema-retrospective study with real-life data after 12 months].
Article in Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft, 2020. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Aflibercept or ranibizumab for diabetic macular edema.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2024Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrently only few data are available on a direct comparison of the treatment reality with ranibizumab and aflibercept in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). This study assessed best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) outcomes and central retinal thickness (CRT) under treatment with ranibizumab and aflibercept. MATERIAL AND
methodsPatients with DME involving the fovea in treatment-naïve eyes and a follow-up period of least 12 months were retrospectively identified. Patients underwent treatment with ranibizumab 0.5 mg or aflibercept 2.0 mg. The findings were obtained using clinical examination, fluorescein angiography and spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT, measuring CRT).
resultsA total of 41 treatment-naïve eyes were identified in 29 patients with DME involving the fovea. The mean 12-month improvement was +9.5 letters in 19 eyes treated with ranibizumab and BCVA improving from 0.57 log MAR (95% confidence interval, CI 0.45-0.70 log MAR) to 0.38 log MAR (95% CI 0.25-0.50 log MAR; p < 0.001) and +8.5 letters in the aflibercept group with 22 eyes and BCVA improving from 0.38 log MAR (95% CI 0.25-0.51 log MAR) to 0.21 log MAR (95% CI 0.08-0.34 log MAR; p < 0.001). The difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (p = 0.599). When the initial visual acuity was 0.4 or less, the mean BCVA improved in 14 eyes treated with ranibizumab from 0.62 log MAR (95% CI 0.47-0.79 log MAR) to 0.38 log MAR (95% CI 0.21-0.55 log MAR), an improvement of 12.0 letters (p < 0.001), in 11 eyes treated with aflibercept from 0.63 log MAR (95% CI 0.42-0.84 log MAR) to 0.29 log MAR (95% CI 0.08-0.50 log MAR), an improvement of 17.0 letters (p < 0.001). The difference between the two groups was significant (p < 0.001). The mean number of intravitreal injections was 6.4 (95% CI 5.1-7.7) in the ranibizumab group, 7.5 (95% CI 6.2-8.8) in the aflibercept group (p = 0.199). The mean CRT decreased significantly (p < 0.001) in patients treated with both ranibizumab and aflibercept without any evidence of a significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.514). DISCUSSION: In the patients studied ranibizumab and aflibercept showed a good safety and efficacy in the treatment of DME regarding BCVA and CRT under real-life conditions after 12 months. In cases of lower initial visual acuity (0.4 or 20/50 or less) aflibercept was more effective at improving vision.
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.