Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33807216›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2021

Subthreshold Diode Micropulse Laser Combined with Intravitreal Therapy for Macular Edema-A Systematized Review and Critical Approach.

Maciej Gawęcki

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Subthreshold laser treatment in retinal diseases: a mini review.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2024
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Maciej GawęckiDobry Wzrok Ophthalmological Clinic, Kliniczna 1B/2, 80-402 Gdańsk, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-2901-0248

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveintravitreal therapy for macular edema (ME) is a common clinical approach to treating most retinal vascular diseases; however, it generates high costs and requires multiple follow-up visits. Combining intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) or steroid therapy with subthreshold diode micropulse laser (SDM) application could potentially reduce the burden of numerous intravitreal injections. This review sought to explore whether this combination treatment is effective in the course of ME secondary to retinal vascular disease, and in particular, determine whether it is comparable or superior to intravitreal therapy alone. MATERIALS AND

methodsthe following terms and Boolean operators were used to search the PubMed literature database: subthreshold micropulse laser, subthreshold diode micropulse OR micropulse laser treatment AND anti-VEGF, anti-VEGF treatment, intravitreal steroids, OR combined therapy.This analysis included all studies discussing the combination of SDM and intravitreal anti-VEGF or steroid treatment.

resultsthe search revealed nine studies that met the inclusion criteria, including five comparing combined treatment and anti-VEGF treatment alone, four covering diabetic ME, and one covering ME secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion. All of these five studies suggested that combination therapy results in fewer intravitreal injections than anti-VEGF monotherapy with non-inferior functional and morphological outcomes. The remaining four studies report functional and morphological improvements after combined treatment; however, SDM alone was never superior to intravitreal-alone or combined treatment. There were substantial differences in treatment protocols and inclusion criteria between the studies.

conclusionsthe available material was too scarce to provide a reliable assessment of the effects of combined therapy and its relation to intravitreal monotherapy in the treatment of ME secondary to retinal vascular disease. One assumption of note is that it is possible that SDM plus anti-VEGF might require fewer intravitreal injections than anti-VEGF monotherapy with equally good functional and morphological results. However, further randomized research is required to confirm this thesis.

Indexed as

anti-VEGF treatmentcombined treatmentdiabetic macular edemaretinal vein occlusionsubthreshold diode micropulse

Identifiers

PMID33807216
PMCPMC8036671
OpenAlexW3151650804

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.