ArticleBMC ophthalmology2023
Analyze of factors and prognosis of eyes lost to follow-up in retinal vein occlusive disease patients receiving anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lost to follow-up while undergoing intravitreal injection therapy: barriers to adherence in a real-world setting.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2026Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatients with macular edema (ME) secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO) who received at least one intravitreal injection of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy (VEGF) and lost to follow-up (LTFU) for more than six months were analyzed to investigate the factors contributing to the LTFU and the prognosis.
methodThis was a retrospective, single-center study to analyze the causes and prognosis of LTFU over six months in RVO-ME patients treated with intravitreal anti-VEGF injections at our institution from January 2019 to August 2022 and to collect patients' baseline characteristics along with the number of injections before LTFU, primary disease, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) before LTFU and after return visit, central macular thickness (CMT), months before LTFU and after LTFU, reasons for LTFU, and complications, to analyze the factors affecting visual outcome at a return visit.
resultsThis study included 125 patients with LTFU; 103 remained LTFU after six months, and 22 returned after LTFU. The common reason for LTFU was "no improvement in vision" (34.4%), followed by "transport inconvenience" (22.4%), 16 patients (12.8%) were unwilling to visit the clinic, 15 patients (12.0%) had already elected to seek treatment elsewhere, 12 patients (9.6%) were not seen in time due to the 2019-nCov epidemic, and 11 patients (8.8%) cannot do it due to financial reasons. The number of injections before LTFU was a risk factor for LTFU (P < 0.05). LogMAR at the initial visit (P < 0.001), CMT at the initial visit (P < 0.05), CMT before the LTFU (P < 0.001), and CMT after the return visit (P < 0.05) were influential factors for logMAR at the return visit.
conclusionMost RVO-ME patients were LTFU after anti-VEGF therapy. Long-term LTFU is greatly detrimental to the visual quality of patients; thus, the management of RVO-ME patients in follow-up should be considered.
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.