ArticleIndian journal of ophthalmology2021
A Delphi method based consensus statement for surgical management of proliferative diabetic retinopathy in India.
Article in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2021. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- A delphi consensus study for treatment of full-thickness macular hole in Taiwan.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Commentary: Delphi method in ophthalmology: The guiding principles from experienced minds for ambiguous clinical situations.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
14 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo derive consensus statements for surgical management of proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) for vitreoretinal (VR) surgeons.
methodsThirteen prolific VR surgeons representing all regions of India were invited to participate in a 42-point questionnaire based on the Delphi methodology describing various surgical scenarios commonly encountered in PDR. Consensus was derived using predefined robust analytics. Scenarios that returned a moderate consensus in round 1 were taken to round 2 as per the Delphi methodology. After considering all inputs, the final consensus criteria were developed.
resultsA strong consensus was derived about waiting for 4 weeks before considering vitrectomy. In treatment-naïve eyes with fresh vitreous hemorrhage (VH), the wait time was slightly shorter for extramacular tractional retinal detachment (2-4 weeks) and longer (4-6 weeks) for eyes treated previously with laser or anti-VEGF agents. The expert panel recommended using preoperative anti-VEGF only in eyes with large membranes requiring extensive dissection. For post vitrectomy VH, while a conservative approach was recommended for the first episode of VH, experts recommended immediate vitreous lavage for recurrent episodes of VH. In eyes with iris neovascularization, the panel recommended immediate anti-VEGF injection followed by early vitreous lavage in nonresponsive eyes. A strong consensus was derived for stopping antiplatelet agents before surgery, while there was only a moderate consensus for performing vitrectomy for recalcitrant macular edema unresponsive to anti-VEGF injections in the absence of traction.
conclusionThis study provides valuable consensus on managing the different scenarios encountered during surgical management of PDR and should help guide the VR surgeons in clinical decision-making.
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.