ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2022
OCT Macular Volume as a Predictor of Vascular Leakage in Uveitis.
Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Effect of postoperative nutrient management on macular edema and visual function following phacoemulsification for age-related cataract.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- Orally administered fluorescein angiography for ultra-wide-field imaging: is a safe and effective modality across different age groups and fundus diseases?Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Article
- Brolucizumab for the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema: An Optical Coherence Tomography-Based Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to evaluate the optical coherence tomography (OCT) macular volume as a marker for active vascular leakage in patients with intermediate and pan uveitis.
methodsIn this single-center prospective longitudinal study, patients were included under three criteria: diagnosed with noninfectious intermediate or pan uveitis; presented vascular leakage at their initial visit; and were imaged with concurrent wide-field fluorescein angiography (FA) and OCT. A scoring system was employed to measure vascular leakage. OCT volume scans were performed on the patients to produce the corresponding thickness map. The central subfield thickness (CST) and macular volume (MV) were calculated. CST is defined as the average thickness within the 1-mm fovea circle, while MV includes the 3-mm and 6-mm circles on the thickness map. Mixed-effects models were applied to analyze the correlation between each patient's OCT and FA imaging results.
resultsA total of 72 patients (115 eyes) were included. The median follow-up time was 11 months (interquartile range 1.8-16.1 months). A total of 679 observations across all time points were analyzed. Both CST and MV were found to be positively associated with the leakage scores (p < 0.001). In the mixed-effects models, MV in the 6-mm circle presented the strongest correlation with leakage scores, which explained 57% of the variation in leakage (p < 0.001). MV in the 3-mm circle and CST explained 45.8% and 39.5%, respectively.
conclusionCST and MV in both the 6-mm and the 3-mm circles demonstrated significant correlations with angiographic inflammatory activity. Among those imaging parameters, MV in the 6-mm circle has the highest correlation. The study results suggest that this parameter can be considered a quantitative and non-invasive alternative to FA for monitoring vasculitic inflammation in uveitis.
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.