Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34834196›Full record

ReviewPharmaceutics2021

Ultrasound and Microbubbles for the Treatment of Ocular Diseases: From Preclinical Research towards Clinical Application.

Charis Rousou, Carl C L Schuurmans, Arto Urtti, Enrico Mastrobattista, Gert Storm, Chrit Moonen, Kai Kaarniranta, Roel Deckers

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmaceutics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Controlled Release of Molecules to Enhance Cell Survival and Regeneration.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Stable Cavitation Interferes with AβJournal of chemical information and modeling · 2022
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Ultrasound stimulation for non-invasive visual prostheses.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2022
    Review
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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Charis RousouDepartments of Pharmaceutics, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 8, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Carl C L SchuurmansDepartments of Pharmaceutics, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 8, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Arto UrttiSchool of Pharmacy, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, 70210 Kuopio, Finland.
Enrico MastrobattistaDepartments of Pharmaceutics, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 8, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Gert StormDepartments of Pharmaceutics, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 8, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4296-2761
Chrit MoonenDivision of Imaging and Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Kai KaarnirantaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Kuopio University Hospital, P.O. Box 100, 70029 Kuopio, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-2600-8679
Roel DeckersDivision of Imaging and Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5281-2949
Utrecht University · NLHeidelberg University · DENational University of Singapore · SGUniversity of Eastern Finland · FIUniversity of Helsinki · FI

Funding

Horizon 2020 722717
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The unique anatomy of the eye and the presence of various biological barriers make efficacious ocular drug delivery challenging, particularly in the treatment of posterior eye diseases. This review focuses on the combination of ultrasound and microbubbles (USMB) as a minimally invasive method to improve the efficacy and targeting of ocular drug delivery. An extensive overview is given of the in vitro and in vivo studies investigating the mechanical effects of ultrasound-driven microbubbles aiming to: (i) temporarily disrupt the blood-retina barrier in order to enhance the delivery of systemically administered drugs into the eye, (ii) induce intracellular uptake of anticancer drugs and macromolecules and (iii) achieve targeted delivery of genes, for the treatment of ocular malignancies and degenerative diseases. Finally, the safety and tolerability aspects of USMB, essential for the translation of USMB to the clinic, are discussed.

Indexed as

blood–retina barriercellular drug deliverydrug deliverymicrobubbleocular drug deliveryultrasoundUSMB

Identifiers

PMID34834196
PMCPMC8624665
OpenAlexW3210671928

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.