ArticleScientific reports2022
Characteristics of major and macular branch retinal vein occlusion.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and effectiveness of anti-VEGF or steroids monotherapy versus combination treatment for macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC ophthalmology · 2022Pooled it
- Association between systemic blood pressure control and outcomes of Conbercept treatment for macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Effect of intravitreal injection of dexamethasone implant on the corneal morphology of young adults with central retinal vein occlusion.International journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Choroidal vascular index alterations in branch retinal vein occlusion: a comparative analysis of anti-VEGF and steroid implants.International ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Predictors of macular edema recurrence and visual outcomes in branch retinal vein occlusion treated with aflibercept or ranibizumab.International ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Molecular and Cellular Mechanisms Involved in the Pathophysiology of Retinal Vascular Disease-Interplay Between Inflammation and Oxidative Stress.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Integrated Assessment of OCT, Multimodal Imaging, and Cytokine Markers for Predicting Treatment Responses in Retinal Vein Occlusion Associated Macular Edema: A Comparative Review of Anti-VEGF and Steroid Therapies.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Relationship between retinal volume changes and the prognosis of BRVO-ME treated with ranibizumab.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Soul: An OCTA dataset based on Human Machine Collaborative Annotation Framework.Scientific data · 2024Article
- Subretinal fluid in macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Intelligent diagnosis of retinal vein occlusion based on color fundus photographs.International journal of ophthalmology · 2024Article
- The progress of assessment methods and treatments of neovascular glaucoma secondary to central retinal vein occlusion.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We compared the aqueous profiles, baseline characteristics, and clinical outcomes of 54 eyes with macular edema secondary to major branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) and macular BRVO. We also identified the characteristics of poor responders to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections. Aqueous inflammatory cytokine and VEGF concentrations were significantly higher in major BRVO. In optical coherence tomography, major BRVO had a higher proportion with subretinal fluid, disorganization of retinal inner layers, and ellipsoid zone disruption. Comparing the clinical outcomes, major BRVO required more intravitreal anti-VEGF injections and had a poorer visual prognosis in the first 12 months. A significantly higher proportion of patients with major BRVO required additional treatments after 6 months compared to macular BRVO. Patients who responded poorly to anti-VEGF had higher aqueous VEGF levels and central subfield thickness (CST) at baseline. In conclusion, major BRVO patients required more and longer treatments, and had worse visual prognoses. BRVO that responds poorly to anti-VEGF had greater CST and higher aqueous VEGF levels at baseline.
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.