ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Comparative study on the efficacy of different aflibercept regimens in the treatment of macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. 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.
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
Objectives: To compare the efficacy of intravitreal injection of aflibercept between the treat-and-extend (TAE) and pro re nata (PRN, as needed) regimens in the treatment of macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion, to determine the best regimen in terms of efficacy. Methods: This was a retrospective case-control study. Totally 62 eyes in 62 patients diagnosed with macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO-ME) from January 2018 to September 2021 were subjected to intravitreal injection of aflibercept according to the different regimens, including the TAE and PRN groups (32 and 30 in the TAE and PRN groups, respectively). Baseline characteristics including age, gender, affected eyes, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and central retinal thickness (CRT) were reviewed. The number of injections, number of visits, as well as BCVA and CRT after 12 months of treatment were collected and compared between two groups. Results: BCVA was 60.7 ± 7.6 and 59.9 ± 6.1 letters at first diagnosis, and 82.1 ± 6.1 and 78.1 ± 5.8 letters after 12 months of treatment in the TAE and PRN groups, respectively. All BCVA was significantly improved from baseline ( Conclusion: The TAE regimen is superior to the PRN regimen in terms of efficacy for aflibercept administration in macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion, with the former regimen also associated with reduced number of injections and visits, as well as decreased burden on patients and physicians.
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.