ArticleEye (London, England)2021
The outcome of fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant is predicted by the response to dexamethasone implant in diabetic macular oedema.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Response to 'Comment on: 'Use of intravitreal fluocinolone acetonide implant in inflammatory macular oedema".Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Efficacy of fluocinolone acetonide implant in diabetic macular edema patients previously treated with dexamethasone implant: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
- The Treatment of Diabetic Retinal Edema with Intravitreal Steroids: How and When.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Efficacity and Safety of the Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant in Uveitic Macular Edema: A Real-Life Study from the French Uveitis Network.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant Injected 1 Month after Dexamethasone Implant for Diabetic Macular Oedema: the ILUVI1MOIS Study.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2023Article
- Pathogenesis and current therapies for non-infectious uveitis.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2023Review
- Factors associated with the response to fluocinolone acetonide 0.19 mg in diabetic macular oedema evaluated as the area-under-the-curve.Eye (London, England) · 2023Article
- Safety and Efficacy of Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant Given Either First-Line or Second-Line in Diabetic Macular Edema.Patient preference and adherence · 2023Review
- Intraocular Pressure Changes After Intravitreal Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant: Results from Four European Countries.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2022Article
- Biomarkers to Predict the Success of Treatment with the Intravitreal 0.19 mg Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant in Uveitic Macular Edema.Pharmaceutics · 2022Article
- Intraocular Pressure Changes Are Predictive of Ocular Hypertension Onset After Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant: Significant Cutoffs and the Role of Previous DEX Implant.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors at 20 institutions in 19 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesTo investigate if the visual and anatomic response to the first dexamethasone implant (DEX) predicts the 12-month clinical outcome after shifting to fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implant in patients with diabetic macular oedema (DMO).
methodsRetrospective cohort study including pseudophakic patients with previously treated DMO, undergone one or more DEX injections before FAc. Functional and morphologic response to DEX was defined based on the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) changes after the first DEX, respectively. Steroid-response was defined as intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation ≥5 mmHg or IOP > 21 mmHg after any previous DEX exposure. Pairwise comparisons for BCVA, CMT, and IOP after FAc were performed with linear mixed models and a repeated-measure design.
resultsForty-four eyes of 33 patients were included. Patients were shifted to FAc after a mean ± standard deviation of 4.6 ± 3.2 DEX injections. Overall, BCVA and CMT improved during the first 12 months after switching to FAc (p = 0.04 and p < 0.001, respectively). Only eyes with a good morphologic response to DEX had a significant CMT reduction after FAc (p < 0.001), while no significant relationship was found between BCVA improvement after DEX and after FAc. IOP elevation occurred in 9 eyes (20%) following DEX implant. These eyes carried a 20-fold increased risk of having an IOP rise after FAc (p < 0.001), with a non-linear relationship between the IOP increase after DEX and the one after FAc.
conclusionThe response to previous DEX may anticipate the morphologic response to subsequent FAc. Eyes with steroid-induced IOP elevation after DEX are at a high risk of IOP increase after FAc. The visual response after FAc was not associated with the visual response to previous steroids, indicating that FAc may have a role also in patients refractory to DEX implant.
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.