ArticleWorld journal of clinical cases2023
Efficacy and safety of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents on corneal neovascularization: A meta-analysis.
Article in World journal of clinical cases, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Challenge of Corneal Ulcer Healing: A Novel Conceptual Framework, the "Triad" of Corneal Ulcer Healing/Corneal Neovascularization/Intraocular Pressure, and Avascular Tendon Healing, for Evaluation of Corneal Ulcer Therapy, Therapy of Neovascularization, Glaucoma Therapy, and Pentadecapeptide BPC 157 Efficacy.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Inorganic nanomaterials as promising therapeutic agents for ocular neovascularization: Progress and perspectives.Materials today. Bio · 2025Review
- Aganirsen as a Therapeutic Alternative for Modulating Corneal Neovascularization: A Real-World Case Series Study.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapies in ophthalmology.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2025Review
- Corneal melting following intrastromal injection of bevacizumab for corneal neovascularization.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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCorneal neovascularization (CoNV) is the second major cause of blindness. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors,
aimWe conducted an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials to examine the efficacy and safety of anti-VEGF in CoNV.
methodsA literature search was conducted using three electronic databases. Mean difference (MD), standard mean difference (SMD), and relative risk (RR) are used to estimate the effect size.
resultsNine randomized controlled and three non-randomized trials were obtained. The pooled results demonstrated a significant reduction of CoNV area/Length (SMD = -1.17, 95%CI: -1.58 to -0.75), best corrected visual acuity (MD = -0.54, 95%CI: -0.91 to -0.17), and graft rejection (RR = 0.44, 95%CI: 0.24 to 0.8) and failure (RR = 0.39, 95%CI: 0.19 to 0.78) rates in the anti-VEGF group than the placebo group. A non-significant reduction of the epithelial defect was also observed in the bevacizumab group compared with the placebo (RR = 0.56, 95%CI: 0.30 to 1.06). Compared with a placebo, the unsynthesizable trials also support that bevacizumab improves visual acuity, CoNV, graft rejection, and failure rates. Trials reporting other comparisons revealed the superiority of combined remedy with bevacizumab compared to other treatments in reducing CoNV.
conclusionAnti-VEGF agents, mainly bevacizumab, are an effective and safe treatment for CoNV of all causes and prevent corneal graft rejection and failure in corneal transplantation.
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.