Trial reportBMC ophthalmology2024
A controlled clinical study on efficacy and safety of periocular triamcinolone acetonide injection for treating ocular myasthenia gravis.
Trial report in BMC ophthalmology, 2024. 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.
- Neomycin sulfate and triamcinolone acetonide suspended ointment designed for transdermal delivery: formulation and in vitro evaluation.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of peribulbar triamcinolone acetonide injection for treating ocular myasthenia gravis (OMG), with a comparison of traditional oral drug therapy.
methodsA total of 22 patients with OMG who received periocular triamcinolone acetonide injection (initially 20 mg weekly, then once per month later if symptoms were improved) from July 2019 to July 2022 were evaluated by a comparison of symptom degree before and after treatment. Adverse reactions were also monitored during the period of treatment. The period of follow-up was more than 6 months. Additionally, a comparison of the treatment efficacy between this periocular injection and traditional oral administration was performed in OMG patients.
resultsAfter 4 weeks of treatment, the degree of ptosis in OMG patients decreased to -3.00 ± 0.69, compared to the value (-0.86 ± 1.32) before treatment. The degree of ophthalmoplegia also decreased from 3.12 ± 0.72 to 0.86 ± 0.88 (P < 0.001) after treatment. The achievement rates of minimal manifestations status (MMS)for ptosis and ophthalmoplegia after 4 week-treatment were 86.3% and 75%, respectively, while they were 50% and 30% in patients with traditional oral administration. There was statistically significant difference only in MMS (rather than symptom relief rate and generalization conversion rate) between two groups. No serious complications (except for intraorbital hematoma) were found in OMG patients during the treatment period.
conclusionRepeated peribulbar injection of triamcinolone acetonide can effectively alleviate the initial symptoms of OMG patients. However, the evaluation of its long-term efficacy is still needed. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY: This study has been clinically registered by Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR), first trial registration date:05/07/2019, registration number: ChiCTR1900024285.
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.