ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2025
Real-World Visual and Anatomical Outcomes of Laser Therapy versus Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Injection for Retinopathy of Prematurity: A 10-Year Retrospective Cohort Study at a Tertiary Center in Thailand.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To assess the visual and anatomical outcomes of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) after treatment with laser therapy versus intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) in real-world practice. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included preterm infants with treatment-requiring ROP that underwent either laser indirect ophthalmoscopy (LIO) or intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy at Ramathibodi Hospital from January 2012 to October 2023. Results: This study included 52 patients (104 eyes). The anti-VEGF (18 patients: 36 eyes) and LIO (34 patients: 68 eyes) groups had comparable baseline characteristics, including mean gestational age (25.80±2.81 vs 25.89±3.84 weeks; p=0.906), birth weight (693.0±34.30 vs 784.5±45.57 g; p=0.170), and mean follow-up duration (4.12±0.59 vs 4.91±0.57 years; p=0.361). Treatment occurred significantly earlier in the anti-VEGF group (postmenstrual age 33.94±0.53 vs 36.30±0.55 weeks; p=0.006). The anti-VEGF group required more follow-up visits from the initial exam until the complete regression of ROP (20.03±10.00 vs 11.80±6.03; p<0.001). The mean final visual acuity (VA) was similar between the anti-VEGF and LIO groups (logMAR 0.490 vs 0.480; p=0.852), although Zone I eyes treated with anti-VEGF tended to have better VA. Among Zone I eyes, those treated with anti-VEGF had significantly less myopia (mean spherical equivalent: -0.60 vs -12.30 D; p=0.007). Only the anti-VEGF group underwent secondary treatment, mainly for persistent avascular retina (44.4% vs 0%; p<0.001), and had treatment failure (16.7% vs 0%; p=0.002). Conclusion: Both anti-VEGF and laser therapy demonstrated nonsignificant difference in functional and anatomical outcomes in treatment-requiring ROP. Notably, Zone I eyes treated with anti-VEGF exhibited significantly less myopia versus those treated with LIO. However, the anti-VEGF group required significantly more hospital visits and secondary treatments.
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.