ReviewBiomedicines2022
Intraoperative Optical Coherence Tomography in the Management of Macular Holes: State of the Art and Future Perspectives.
Review in Biomedicines, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inverted internal limiting membrane flap technique versus internal limiting membrane removal in large macular hole with different hole edge configurations: a comparative study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical significance of signal shadowing during intraoperative optical coherence tomography-assisted vitreoretinal surgery.Scientific reports · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-invasive diagnostic technologies in ophthalmology have substantially transformed contemporary clinical practice. Intraoperative optical coherence tomography (iOCT) systems have recently been used for various surgical interventions, including the treatment of full-thickness macular holes (FTMHs). MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted a systematic review on the use of iOCT and its possible benefits in the management of FTMHs, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (PRISMA). The level of evidence according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (OCEM) 2011 guidelines, and the quality of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system, were assessed for all included articles.
results1131 articles were initially extracted, out of which 694 articles were obtained after duplicates were removed and their abstracts screened. A total of 65 articles was included for full-text review. Finally, 17 articles remained that fulfilled the inclusion criteria.
conclusionsEven though there is just a small number of studies with solid results, the use of iOCT in FTMH surgery may be a helpful tool for both novice and experienced surgeons planning and managing difficult cases. Additionally, it could be used for teaching reasons and for exploring novel surgical techniques.
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.