ArticleDie Ophthalmologie2024
[Current treatment strategies for vitreomacular traction and macular holes: a survey of retinal specialists in Germany].
Article in Die Ophthalmologie, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the different treatment strategies for eyes with vitreomacular traction (VMT) and macular holes (MF) regarding the indications and initiation of treatment.
objectiveThe aim of this study is to facilitate clinical decision making by presenting the opinions of experienced retinal specialists in the context of the current literature and the changed approval situation for ocriplasmin. MATERIAL AND
methodsMembers of the German Retina Society (RG) were questioned in an online survey. Based on a literature review a 100-question questionnaire was created and sent to all members of the RG via an electronic link to the online platform "LimeSurvey". Voluntary participation was possible from 15 October 2021 to 15 November 2021. Data collection and statistical analysis were anonymized.
resultsThe responses of the 115 participants were congruent with the presentation of the new S1 guidelines on this topic. The indications for active treatment of focal VMT without MF were postponed in favor of watchful waiting, with the individual symptoms of the patient playing a major role in the proposed temporal management. The results on the indications for vitrectomy are consistent and convincingly confirm the opinions on the efficacy and risk assessment of this therapeutic procedure.
conclusionThe results presented provide an overview of the consensus and controversies in the current treatment options for VMT and MF. With the help of a homogeneous and experienced group of retinal experts, it was possible to develop individual treatment strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39325177What 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.