ArticleEye (London, England)2025
The impact of vitreomacular traction on vitreous vascular endothelial growth factor and placental growth factor levels in neovascular age-related macular degeneration patients.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ultrasound-Enhanced Assessment of Vitreous Status in Exudative AMD: Associations with Neovascular Phenotypes, Treatment Burden, and Functional Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Updates on novel and traditional OCT and OCTA biomarkers in nAMD.Eye (London, England) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the effect of vitreomacular traction (VMT) on vitreous vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and placental growth factor (PlGF) levels in patients with active neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).
designA prospective, interventional, case-control study.
methodsThe study included a total of 70 patients from whom vitreous samples were obtained. The patients were categorized into four group: 10 patients with active nAMD accompanying VMT, 17 patients with VMT, 24 patients with active nAMD and 19 healthy patients without any diagnosis other than cataract. VEGF and PlGF levels were measured.
resultsThe mean vitreous VEGF level was 34.7 ± 4.98 pg/ml in the nAMD and VMT group, 32.36 ± 4.55 pg/ml in the VMT group, 34.02 ± 3.79 pg/ml in the nAMD group, and 32.33 ± 2.4 pg/ml in the healthy control group. The mean vitreous PlGF level was 58.92 ± 20.83 pg/ml in the nAMD and VMT group, 46.29 ± 3.45 pg/ml in the VMT group, 54.64 ± 16.88 pg/ml in the nAMD group, and 53.66 ± 19.35 pg/ml in the healthy control group. No significant differences were observed in terms of vitreous VEGF and PlGF concentrations among the groups (p > 0.05 and p > 0.05, respectively). Aqueous humour VEGF and PlGF levels were significantly higher than vitreous levels in nAMD patients (p = 0.005 and p = 0.005, respectively).
conclusionThe present study found no increases in vitreous VEGF and PlGF levels in both VMT + nAMD and VMT cases. Furthermore, patients with nAMD had significantly higher levels of PlGF and VEGF in aqueous humour compared to vitreous levels.
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.