SynthesisBMJ open ophthalmology2026
Comparative efficacy of different treatment modalities in the management of macular oedema in retinitis pigmentosa: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ open ophthalmology, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the efficacy of current treatments for retinitis pigmentosa (RP)-associated macular oedema using network meta-analysis (NMA). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Electronic databases were searched for studies reporting changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT). A frequentist NMA was performed and treatment hierarchies were estimated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve.
results12 studies were included to compare the following: oral acetazolamide 500 mg/day, oral methazolamide 50-100 mg/day, topical dorzolamide 2% three times daily, topical ketorolac 0.5% four times daily, intravenous umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells (UCMSCs; single administration of 3×10⁶ cells), intravitreal dexamethasone implant (DEXi) 0.7 mg, intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) 4 mg, sub-Tenon TA (STTA) 20 mg, intravitreal bevacizumab 1.25 mg and intravitreal ranibizumab 0.5 mg. Regarding changes in BCVA at 3-4 months, oral carbonic anhydrase inhibitors (CAIs) showed greater BCVA improvement compared with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapies; however, no intervention demonstrated statistically significant superiority in BCVA at 12 months. At 3-4 months, DEXi, acetazolamide, methazolamide and dorzolamide demonstrated comparable CMT reduction and outperformed anti-VEGF therapies, IVTA, STTA, intravenous UCMSC and control. By 12 months, dorzolamide (vs acetazolamide: -169.50 µm (95% CI -331.83 to -7.17) and vs methazolamide: -185.49 µm (95% CI -354.35 to -16.63)) and DEXi (vs acetazolamide: -147.00 µm (95% CI -206.58 to -87.42) and vs methazolamide: -162.99 µm (95% CI -238.56 to -87.42)) provided significantly greater CMT reduction than acetazolamide and methazolamide.
conclusionsCAIs and DEXi demonstrated the greatest long-term anatomical benefit for RP-associated macular oedema, whereas durable BCVA gains remained limited across available therapies. While oral and topical CAIs showed comparable short-term efficacy, topical dorzolamide and DEXi provided greater long-term CMT reduction than oral CAIs. Given the limited number of studies and small sample sizes, these findings should be interpreted cautiously and validated in larger randomised controlled trials.
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.