ArticleBMC ophthalmology2020
Differential response to intravitreal dexamethasone implant in naïve and previously treated diabetic macular edema eyes.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of single-dose dexamethasone implantation for patients with persistent diabetic macular edema: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2022Pooled it
- Use of a multifocal electroretinogram to evaluate the therapeutic effect of a single intravitreal dexamethasone implant, OzurdexInternational journal of retina and vitreous · 2025Article
- Efficacy of Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant (OzurdexMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Real-World Results in Treating Diabetic Macular Edema With Faricimab at a London-Based Tertiary Eye Hospital.Cureus · 2024Article
- The Treatment of Diabetic Retinal Edema with Intravitreal Steroids: How and When.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Suboptimal outcomes and treatment burden of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment for diabetic macular oedema in phakic patients.Eye (London, England) · 2024Article
- Dexamethasone implant in naive versus refractory patients with diabetic macular edema: a Meta-analysis.International journal of ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Visual and Anatomical Outcomes of a Single Intravitreal Dexamethasone in Diabetic Macular Edema: An 8 Year Real-World Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Healthcare expenditure of intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors compared with dexamethasone implant for diabetic macular oedema.Acta ophthalmologica · 2022Article
- Intravitreal Corticosteroid Implantation in Diabetic Macular Edema: Updated European Consensus Guidance on Monitoring and Managing Intraocular Pressure.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo identify different response patterns to intravitreal dexamethasone implants (IDI) in naïve and previously treated (PT) diabetic macular edema (DME) eyes in a real-life setting.
methods342 IDI injections (203 DME eyes) were included. Number of IDI injections, percentage (%) of eyes with 1, 2, 3 and ≥ 4 injections, time to reinjections, visual acuity (VA), intraocular pressure (IOP) and central retinal thickness (CRT) were evaluated for naïve and PT DME eyes over 24 months.
resultsMean number of injections was significantly lower in naïve vs PT DME eyes (1.40 ± 0.9 vs 1.82 ± 0.9, p < 0.001). The percentage of eyes receiving 1 injection was significantly higher in naïve vs PT DME eyes (76.1 vs 47.7), (p < 0.001). However, it was significantly lower for 2 (16.4 vs 29.4), or 3 injections (1.4 vs 17.6) (both p < 0.001), with no differences in eyes receiving ≥4 injections (5.9 vs 5.1 respectively, p = 0.80). Mean time to reinjection was not significantly different between both groups for the second, third and fourth injection (9.6 ± 4.0 vs 10.0 ± 5.5, p = 0.75, 13.2 ± 4.0 vs 16.0 ± 3.5, p = 0.21 and 21.7 ± 3.8 vs 19.7 ± 5.8, p = 0.55). VA scores were consistently better in naïve vs PT DME eyes at all studied timepoints, with no significant differences in CRT reduction or adverse effect rates.
conclusionNaïve DME eyes received lower number of IDI injections and showed better VA levels than PT DME eyes for 24 months in a real-world setting. This data supports the IDI use in early DME stages and provide further evidence of better IDI response when used as first-line therapy.
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.