ArticleJournal of ophthalmic & vision research
Oral Vitamin D Supplementation and Clinical Outcomes of Intravitreal Bevacizumab Injection for Macular Edema Secondary to Retinal Vein Occlusions.
Article in Journal of ophthalmic & vision research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Bevacizumab and beyond: investigating the role of combination therapies in the management of retinal diseases.International ophthalmology · 2025Review
- Diabetic retinopathy: a comprehensive review of pathophysiology and emerging treatments.Molecular biology reports · 2025Review
- Vitamin D deficiency in patients with retinal vein occlusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2024Review
- Retinal Vein Occlusion-Background Knowledge and Foreground Knowledge Prospects-A Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Review
- Article
- A comparative study of retinal vein occlusion and serum 25 hydroxy Vitamin D at a tertiary care centre.Oman journal of ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the therapeutic response of retinal vein occlusion (RVO) to intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) with and without concomitant vitamin D supplementation. Methods: Seventy eyes of 68 patients with macular edema associated with branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) and central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) received three monthly IVB injections. Patients with serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH) D) higher than 30 ng/ml were considered as the sufficient group. Cases with serum 25(OH) D levels below 30 ng/ml were randomized into the treatment and control groups. The control group received 50,000 IU of oral vitamin D, weekly for two months. One month after the last IVB injection, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) were measured and compared with the preinjection values. Results: While 43 eyes (61.4%) of 42 patients had BRVO, 27 eyes (38.6%) of 26 patients had CRVO. In BRVO patients, changes of CMT and BCVA were not significantly different between the sufficient, control, and treatment groups ( Conclusion: Oral vitamin D supplement therapy may improve anatomical and functional outcomes in patients with CRVO and vitamin D deficiency.
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.