Observational studyGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2023
Ten-year follow-up and sequential evaluation of multifocal retinal pigment epithelium abnormalities in central serous chorioretinopathy.
Observational study in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Structure-Function Correlation in Patients With Central Serous Chorioretinopathy During Initial Disease Activity and After Ten Years.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2026Article
- Towards an objective classification of pachychoroid disease and its risk of progression.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Familial Occurrence of a Severe Phenotype of Central Serous Chorioretinopathy in Two Brothers.Cureus · 2024Article
- The Complement System as a Therapeutic Target in Retinal Disease.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe study aims to analyze the 10-year outcomes in "simple" and "complex" central serous chorioretinopathy (CSCR) and to evaluate the longitudinal changes in multifocal retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) alterations.
methodsThis was a retrospective, multicentric, longitudinal, observational study in patients with a diagnosis of CSCR. Visual acuity outcomes and recurrence characteristics of simple and complex were analyzed. Changes in number of foci of RPE alterations from baseline to last visit were evaluated.
resultsOut of 235 eyes screened, the study included 67 eyes of 39 patients (32 males and 7 females) with CSCR (12 simple and 55 complex CSCR). A total of 17 (29.9%) eyes had a unifocal RPE alteration, while the remaining 50 had multifocal RPE alterations at baseline. In eyes with complex CSCR, the 10-year visual acuity was significantly worse (p < 0.001), more number of eyes required treatment (p = 0.03), higher number of RPE alterations were present at baseline and last follow-up (p < 0.001 for both), and number of recurrences were higher (p < 0.001), than simple CSCR. Focal collections of RPE alterations and leakage site corresponded to mid-phase hyper-fluorescent plaques (MPHP) in all eyes. On multivariate regression analysis, a larger area of RPE alteration was associated with a worser 10-year visual acuity (p = 0.004) and complex CSCR was associated with higher number of recurrence (p = 0.005).
conclusionA different course of disease progression was seen in simple and complex CSCR. An evolution in foci of RPE alterations was seen, from a simple area of MPHP, to focal RPE alterations and finally to leakage.
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.