Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35672807›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of retina and vitreous2022

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists for chronic central serous chorioretinopathy: systematic review and meta-analyses.

Camila Q Felipe, Ana Luiza Biancardi, Vinicius T Civile, Nelson Carvas Junior, Pedro D Serracarbassa, Marcia K Koike

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of retina and vitreous, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Interventions for central serous chorioretinopathy: a network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Pathomechanisms in central serous chorioretinopathy: A recent update.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2023
    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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Camila Q FelipePostgraduate Program in Health Sciences, Institute of Medical Care for Civil Servants in the State of São Paulo (IAMSPE), São Paulo, Brazil.
Ana Luiza BiancardiLaboratory of Infectious Diseases in Ophthalmology, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Vinicius T CivileDepartment of Medicine, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Nelson Carvas JuniorCochrane Brazil and Department of Physiotherapy, Paulista University, São Paulo, Brazil.
Pedro D SerracarbassaPostgraduate Program in Health Sciences, IAMSPE, São Paulo, Brazil.
Marcia K KoikePostgraduate Program in Health Sciences, IAMSPE and Laboratory of Medical Investigation 51 (LIM-51), University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. mkkoike17@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5556-8061
Hospital do Servidor Público Estadual · BRCochrane · BRFundação Oswaldo Cruz · BRUniversidade de São Paulo · BRUniversidade Federal de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) are widely used for chronic central serous chorioretinopathy (cCSCR), but their effectiveness remains unclear. This research was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of this drugs for cCSCR.

methodsThis is a review of randomized clinical trials (RCT) comparing MRAs to placebo in adults with cCSCR, using the effects of MRAs on best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and adverse events as primary outcomes and the effects of MRAs on anatomical parameters as secondary outcomes: central subfield thickness (CST), subretinal fluid height (SFH) and central choroidal thickness (CCT). Our all-language online search included Medline (via PubMed), Central, Embase, Lilacs, Ibecs, and RCT registers platforms, as late as May 2021. We used the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (version 2) to assess the methodological quality of each study and synthesized the results in meta-analyses using a random-effects model.

resultsThe search identified 302 records, five of which were eligible, totaling 225 cCSCR patients (aged 45-62 years; M/F ratio 3.1:1) treated for 1 to 12 months with spironolactone (50 mg/day) or eplerenone (50 mg/day) vs. placebo. Moderate-certainty evidence suggests MRAs result in little to no improvement in BCVA compared to placebo (SMD 0.22; 95% CI - 0.04 to 0.48; studies = 5; comparisons = 6; participants = 218; I

conclusionMRAs have little to no effect on BCVA. Evidence for adverse events and CST is very uncertain. MRAs also have little to no effect on SFH and CCT. These findings should be considered when prescribing MRAs for cCSCR. This research was previous registration in the PROSPERO platform (CRD42020182601).

Indexed as

Central Serous ChorioretinopathyEplerenoneMineralocorticoid Receptor AntagonistsSpironolactone

Identifiers

PMID35672807
PMCPMC9172176
OpenAlexW4281685591

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.