ArticleInternational ophthalmology2024
Comparison of intravitreal bevacizumab monotherapy and combined laser photocoagulation and intravitreal bevacizumab therapy in the same session in the treatment of aggressive retinopathy of prematurity.
Article in International 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.
- Laser Photocoagulation Subsequent to Intravitreal Ranibizumab for Retinopathy of Prematurity Long-Term Efficacy in Extremely Low Birth Weight Twins.Journal of ophthalmology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the results of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) monotherapy and combined intravitreal bevacizumab and laser photocoagulation (LPC) therapies applied in the same session to patients with aggressive retinopathy of prematurity (A-ROP) in our clinic.
methodsThe study included 67 eyes of 37 patients diagnosed with A-ROP and treated. Forty-nine eyes treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agent injection monotherapy for A-ROP treatment were included in the first group. The second group consisted of 18 eyes that received injection therapy and LPC treatment. The clinical findings of the two groups were investigated, and their treatment results were compared.
resultsRecurrence was observed in 19 of the 49 (38%) eyes in the first group, but there was no recurrence in any of the cases in the second group. While only IVB was applied to eight cases with recurrence, the combination of LPC and IVB treatment was applied to 11 cases. A second recurrence was detected in two of the eight cases that had received IVB monotherapy as a treatment for recurrence and in three of the 11 cases that had received LPC and IVB. The treatment outcomes of the two groups did not statistically significantly differ (P = 0.181).
conclusionWe consider that the combined simultaneous LPC and IVB treatment we applied in A-ROP cases is an effective approach, particularly for cases where there are concerns about the patient's ability to attend follow-up appointments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38954120What 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.