Observational studyIrish journal of medical science2025
Efficacy of Ozurdex implants as second-line therapy for non-responders to anti-VEGF in retinal vein occlusion-associated macular edema: a retrospective cohort study.
Observational study in Irish journal of medical science, 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.
- Twelve‑month Response and Safety of Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant in Treatment‑Naïve and Recalcitrant Cystoid Macular Edema Secondary to Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion (TREAT-BRVO Study).Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRetinal vein occlusion (RVO) is a prevalent retinal vascular disorder characterized by retinal haemorrhage, neovascularization, and macular edema This study aimed to assess the structural and functional effects of intravitreal implant (Ozurdex) treatment as a second-line for RVO-associated macular edema in patients who did not respond to first-line anti-VEGF therapy. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted a retrospective observational cohort study using electronic health records of RVO patients at Salisbury District Hospital between January 2014 and December 2019. Inclusion criteria included patients diagnosed with central or branch RVO. Patients underwent ophthalmic evaluations at baseline, including central retinal thickness (CRT) and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) assessments. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics, employing various tests to determine significance.
resultsSixteen eyes of 16 White British patients were evaluated. Most patients had branch RVO (52.95%), and 47.05% had central RVO. While anti-VEGF treatment significantly improved BCVA (p = 0.0061), Ozurdex did not result in additional gain (p = 0.747). Both treatments significantly reduced CRT (p = 0.0055 for anti-VEGF; p = 0.0079 for Ozurdex). No significant differences were observed between diabetic and non-diabetic BCVA patients receiving either treatment.
conclusionOzurdex emerges as a safe and effective option for persistent macular edema in RVO patients unresponsive to anti-VEGF therapy. Although structural improvements in CRT were observed following Ozurdex treatment, they did not correlate with additional gain in BCVA. Despite this, the reduced treatment frequency of Ozurdex compared to anti-VEGF injections may be advantageous, particularly for frail non-responding patients minimizing treatment burden.
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.