SynthesisGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2026
Effectiveness and safety of intravenous thrombolysis for non-arteritic central retinal artery occlusion: A GRADE-assessed meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2026. 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
objectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness and safety of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in patients with non-arteritic central retinal artery occlusion (NA-CRAO), using a GRADE-assessed meta-analysis.
methodsA systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane CENTRAL up to March 2025. Studies eligible included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational designs evaluating IVT (alteplase or tenecteplase) against any comparator in NA-CRAO patients. Visual acuity (VA), visual recovery (VR), and adverse events were analyzed. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4, calculating mean differences (MD) and risk differences (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), employing a random-effects model. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2.0 and NOS tools. GRADE criteria evaluated evidence certainty.
resultsTen studies (3 RCTs, 7 cohorts) involving 579 patients (224 IVT, 355 control) were included. IVT did not significantly improve VA (MD: -0.16; 95% CI: -0.35 to 0.03; P = 0.1) but showed a significant VR benefit (RD: 0.17; number needed to treat (NNT) = 6; 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.25; P < 0.0001), especially with early administration (< 4.5 h; RD: 0.24; NNT = 4). No significant differences in adverse events were found, including symptomatic ICH (RD: 0.00; 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.03; P = 1).
conclusionsIVT significantly improves VR, particularly when administered within 4.5 h, while no significant improvement in VA was observed except at 1 week. Safety outcomes were comparable to controls. These findings suggest that while IVT does not alter final VA, it may increase the probability of achieving earlier functional recovery within a narrow therapeutic window.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41758379What 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.