ReviewDie Ophthalmologie2026
[Are pachychoroid diseases really a continuum?]
Review in Die 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Whether pachychoroid macular diseases represent a true disease continuum remains unresolved. Shared choroidal features, including pachyvessels, choroidal hyperpermeability and venous outflow abnormalities as well as clinically reported transitions from pachychoroid pigment epitheliopathy/central serous chorioretinopathy (PPE/CSC) to pachychoroid neovasculopathy (PNV) and from PNV to pachychoroid aneurysmal type 1 choroidal neovascularization/polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PAT1/PCV) support a spectrum concept; however, the current level of evidence is low and largely based on clinical observations, retrospective cohorts and small case series with heterogeneous definitions, selected populations and usually without independent reading center assessment. Recent studies further strengthen the opposing standpoint: choroidal thickness alone is neither necessary nor sufficient, PNV likely includes different subtypes and PCV/PAT1 is etiologically heterogeneous. Epidemiological differences between classical CSC and classical PCV/PAT1 also argue against a simple linear single-disease model. Currently, a cautious, nonlinear spectrum model with possible but not obligatory progression pathways is therefore preferable to the assumption of one single disease evolving through fixed stages.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42881238What 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.