ReviewJournal of ophthalmic inflammation and infection2024
Fluocinolone acetonide 0.2 µg/day intravitreal implant in non-infectious uveitis affecting the posterior segment: EU expert user panel consensus-based clinical recommendations.
Review in Journal of ophthalmic inflammation and infection, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical effectiveness of the 0.18 mg fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant for non-infectious uveitis-associated macular edema: a real-world study.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Navigating the Therapeutic Landscape of Non-Infectious Uveitis Despite Major Gaps.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Ocular gene therapy as a sustained drug delivery system: pharmacokinetic and genokinetic perspectives.Journal of medicine and life · 2025Review
- A Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of the 0.19 mg Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant in Non-Infectious Uveitis.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- [Uveitis and multiple sclerosis : Clinical aspects, diagnostics, management and treatment].Die Ophthalmologie · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-infectious uveitis affecting the posterior segment of the eye (NIU-PS) is an inflammatory disease, which can significantly impair visual acuity if not adequately treated. Fluocinolone-acetonide sustained-release-0.2 µg/day intravitreal (FAc) implants are indicated for prevention of relapse in recurrent NIU-PS. The aim here was to provide treating clinicians with some consensus-based-recommendations for the clinical management of patients with NIU-PS with 0.2 µg/day FAc implants.
methodsA European-clinical-expert-group agreed to develop a consensus report on different issues related to the use of FAc implants in patients with NIU-PS.
resultsThe Clinical-expert-panel provided specific recommendations focusing on clinical presentation (unilateral/bilateral) of the NIU-PS; systemic involvement of NIU-PS and the lens status. Treatment algorithms were developed; one that refers to the management of patients with NIU-PS in clinical practice and another that establishes the best clinical scenarios for the use of FAc implants, both as monotherapy and as adjuvant therapy. Additionally, the Clinical-expert-panel has provided recommendations about the use of the FAc implants in a clinical-setting. The Clinical-expert-panel also considered the safety profile of FAc implants and their possible implications in the daily practice.
conclusionsAs more clinical experience has been gained using FAc implants, it was necessary to update the clinical recommendations that guide patient management in the clinic. The current consensus document addresses relevant issues related to the use of FAc implants on different types of patients with various etiologies of NIU-PS, and was conducted to standardize approaches to help specialists obtain better clinical outcomes.
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.