ArticleOphthalmology. Retina2020
Evaluation of Potential Systemic Adverse Events Related to Fluorescein Angiography in Pediatric Patients.
Article in Ophthalmology. Retina, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oral Fluorescein Angiography with Ultra-Wide-Field Scanning Laser Ophthalmoscopy in Pediatric Patients Precis: Oral Fluorescein Angiography in Children.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Advances in retinopathy of prematurity imaging.Saudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate adverse events of fluorescein angiography (FA) in pediatric patients.
designSingle-institution retrospective chart review.
participantsPatients 0 to 18 years of age who underwent FA between January 2010 and December 2015 at a single institution in the United States.
methodsPediatric patients who underwent FA by 3 surgeons were included in the study. Patients with fewer than 24 hours of documented follow-up were excluded. Significant adverse events within 24 hours of FA were evaluated. Detailed intraoperative and perioperative physiological parameters, including heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, and ventilation parameters, in inpatients undergoing simultaneous examination under anesthesia were reviewed. Peri-injection effects of FA were evaluated by 2-tailed paired t test comparison of mean 5-minute preinjection and 5-minute postinjection physiological data.
main outcome measuresSignificant adverse events associated with FA.
resultsOne hundred fifteen patients with a total of 214 FA examinations were included. No significant adverse events were associated directly with FA. Comparison of mean 5-minute preinjection and postinjection physiologic parameters in 27 patients who underwent intravenous FA during EUA did not reveal significant changes associated with FA. A significant difference was found in average patient age between inpatient (2.5 years) and outpatient (10.7 years) FA (P < 0.00001). The youngest patients who underwent successful FA were 3.8 years old in the outpatient setting and 32 weeks' postmenstrual age in the inpatient setting. Patients younger than 3.8 years accounted for most (77.6%; n = 85) inpatient FA examinations. Excluding patients with a need or likely need for laser or surgery, the reasons for inpatient FA in patients older than 3.8 years included the lack of availability of outpatient ultra-widefield FA (UWFA) and more challenging situations in patients with developmental delay.
conclusionsFluorescein angiography was not found to be associated directly with systemic adverse events in pediatric patients in this study. Younger patients more commonly were found to require an inpatient FA, whereas older patients older than 4 years underwent outpatient UWFA.
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.