Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35615084›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2022

Intravitreal Anti-vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Injection for Retinopathy of Prematurity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Nada O Taher, Abdullah A Ghaddaf, Sarah A Al-Ghamdi, Jumanah J Homsi, Bandar J Al-Harbi, Lugean K Alomari, Hashem S Almarzouki

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Avascular Peripheral Retina in Infants.Turkish journal of ophthalmology · 2023
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Nada O TaherCollege of Medicine, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Abdullah A GhaddafCollege of Medicine, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Sarah A Al-GhamdiOphthalmology Saudi Board Program, Jeddah Eye Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Jumanah J HomsiCollege of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Bandar J Al-HarbiOphthalmology Saudi Board Program, Jeddah Eye Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Lugean K AlomariCollege of Medicine, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Hashem S AlmarzoukiCollege of Medicine, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
King Abdullah International Medical Research Center · SAKing Fahad Hospital Jeddah · SAKing Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences · SAKing Abdulaziz University · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Laser photocoagulation and/or intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections constitute the current standard treatment for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of anti-VEGF monotherapy for ROP treatment using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Methods: We searched the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared intravitreal anti-VEGF monotherapy (e.g., bevacizumab, ranibizumab, aflibercept, and pegaptanib) with laser photocoagulation in preterm infants with ROP. We evaluated the rates of recurrence, treatment switching, retreatment, adverse events, and mortality. The risk ratio (RR) was used to represent dichotomous outcomes. Data were pooled using the inverse variance weighting method. The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Risk of bias was assessed using the Revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials. Results: Seven RCTs ( Conclusion: Overall, intravitreal anti-VEGF monotherapy was associated with fewer adverse events than laser therapy, rated as high quality of evidence according to the GRADE criteria. Pooled analysis revealed no significant difference between the two arms with respect to the recurrence rate, treatment switching, retreatment, and mortality rate, with quality of evidence ranging from moderate to very low as per the GRADE approach. Systematic Review Registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails], identifier [CRD42021270077].

Indexed as

anti-vascular endothelial growth factorbevacizumablaser photocoagulationranibizumabretinopathy of prematurity

Identifiers

PMID35615084
PMCPMC9124790
OpenAlexW4229363766

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.