ArticleScientific reports2021
Impact of macular fluid features on outcomes of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment for type 3 macular neovascularization.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Two-year treatment outcomes in neovascular age-related macular degeneration with type 3 macular neovascularisation.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- To Treat or Not to Treat? Resolving the Question of Subretinal and Intraretinal Fluid in Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Narrative Review.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We evaluated the impact of macular fluid features on visual and anatomical outcomes in type 3 macular neovascularization (MNV) patients treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). We retrospectively enrolled 89 eyes with type 3 MNV with at least 12 months of follow-up. All patients were treatment-naïve and received a monthly loading injection of anti-VEGF for three months, followed by further injections as required. The association of baseline macular morphology, including intraretinal fluid (IRF) and subretinal fluid (SRF), with visual and anatomical outcomes was analyzed. At baseline, IRF was present in all enrolled patients (100%), and SRF was present in 43.8% (39/89) of them. After 12 months of treatment, no significant difference was found in terms of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and changes in central foveal thickness between the eyes with (39) and without (50) SRF at baseline. In addition, the proportion of improved or worsened (gain or loss of more than three lines in the BCVA) visual acuity at 12 months was not significantly different among the groups. Incidence of macular atrophy during the treatment showed no difference between the groups, regardless of the presence of SRF. In conclusion, the macular fluid morphology, specifically SRF, in type 3 MNV showed no significant correlation with visual and anatomical outcomes during anti-VEGF treatment.
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.