ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Intraoperative OCT-Guided Selective Epiretinal Membrane (ERM) Peeling Versus ERM and Internal Limiting Membrane Peeling for Tractional Macular Edema in Diabetic Eyes.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- DME-RWKV: An Interpretable Multimodal Deep Learning Framework for Predicting Anti-VEGF Response in Diabetic Macular Edema.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimDespite the abundant literature, internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling remains a controversial topic, especially in diabetic eyes. We compared the safety and effectiveness of intraoperative optical coherence tomography (iOCT)-assisted selective epiretinal membrane (ERM) peeling with dye-assisted ERM and ILM peeling, for the treatment of tractional diabetic macular edema (tDME). MATERIAL AND
methodsIn this single-center retrospective study, we evaluated consecutive patients with tDME who underwent iOCT-assisted selective ERM peeling (Group A) or "dual blue" dye-assisted ERM and ILM peeling (Group B). Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) were compared over a 12-month follow-up. A linear mixed model analysis was performed.
resultsAt baseline, the two groups were comparable in terms of their demographic and clinical outcomes. No significant difference between BCVA and CMT was observed among the groups. Both groups showed significant improvement in outcomes at the last follow-up (
conclusionsiOCT-assisted ERM removal may be as effective as dye-assisted ERM and ILM peeling to treat tDME. Additionally, it ensures a quicker recovery of visual function and macular thickness. The observed ERM recurrence within the 1-year follow-up was mild and did not necessitate additional surgery.
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.