SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2020
Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for macular oedema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of intravitreal VEGF inhibitors on cardiorenal outcomes.Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association · 2023Pooled it
- Trial
- Article
- Intraoperative Anti-VEGF vs. Photocoagulation during Vitrectomy for Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion with Vitreous Hemorrhage: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- EPIRETINAL MACROPHAGE-LIKE CELL ALTERATIONS FOLLOWING ANTI-VASCULAR ENDOTHELIAL GROWTH FACTOR THERAPY IN BRANCH RETINAL VEIN OCCLUSION WITH MACULAR EDEMA: A Retrospective Longitudinal Study.Retina (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2026Article
- Influence of Anti-VEGF Injections on Longitudinal Changes in Vascular Metrics Measured by OCTA in Age Related Macular Degeneration: A Retrospective Real-World Study.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Short and long-term impact of intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy interruption in retinal vein occlusion during the COVID-19 pandemic: functional outcomes and AI-based fluid analysis of macular edema.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2025Article
- Comparison of Choroidal Thickness in Affected and Fellow Eyes of Treatment-Naive Retinal Vein Occlusion Patients.Cureus · 2025Article
- Effectiveness and cytokine profile of combined anti-vascular endothelial growth factor and corticosteroid therapy for chronic retinal vein occlusion.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025Observational
- Outcomes of Anti-VEGF Therapy in Eyes with Diabetic Macular Edema, Vein Occlusion-Related Macular Edema, and Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Systematic Review.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Review
- Analyze of factors and prognosis of eyes lost to follow-up in retinal vein occlusive disease patients receiving anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy.BMC ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Hemiretinal vein occlusion 12-month outcomes are unique with vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors: data from the Fight Retinal Blindness! Registry.The British journal of ophthalmology · 2023Observational
- Impact of anti-VEGF therapy on distinctive retina layers in patients with macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion.BMC ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Review
- Effect of Repeated Intravitreal Injections in Glaucoma Spectrum Diseases.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Article
- [Ischemia and laser photocoagulation in retinal vein occlusion].Die Ophthalmologie · 2022Review
- Wide-field swept-source OCT angiography of the periarterial capillary-free zone before and after anti-VEGF therapy for branch retinal vein occlusion.Eye and vision (London, England) · 2022Article
- Real-world treatment intensities and pathways of macular edema following retinal vein occlusion in Korea from Common Data Model in ophthalmology.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Estimating ranibizumab injection numbers and visual acuity at 12 months based on 2-month data on branch retinal vein occlusion treatment.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Recommendations for Off-Label Drug Use in Ophthalmology in China: A Clinical Practice Guideline.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBranch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) is one of the most commonly occurring retinal vascular abnormalities. The most common cause of visual loss in people with BRVO is macular oedema (MO). Grid or focal laser photocoagulation has been shown to reduce the risk of visual loss. Limitations to this treatment exist, however, and newer modalities may have equal or improved efficacy. Antiangiogenic therapy with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) has recently been used successfully to treat MO resulting from a variety of causes.
objectivesTo investigate the efficacy and gather evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the potential harms of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents for the treatment of macular oedema (MO) secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO). SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2019, Issue 6); MEDLINE Ovid; Embase Ovid; the ISRCTN registry; ClinicalTrials.gov; and the WHO ICTRP. The date of the last search was 12 June 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating BRVO. Eligible trials had to have at least six months' follow-up where anti-VEGF treatment was compared with another treatment, no treatment, or placebo. We excluded trials where combination treatments (anti-VEGF plus other treatments) were used; and trials that investigated the dose and duration of treatment without a comparison group (other treatment/no treatment/sham). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted the data using standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with an improvement from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity of greater than or equal to 15 letters (3 lines) on the Early Treatment in Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Chart at six months and 12 months of follow-up. The secondary outcomes were the proportion of participants who lost greater than or equal to 15 ETDRS letters (3 lines) and the mean visual acuity (VA) change at six and 12 months, as well as the change in central retinal thickness (CRT) on optical coherence tomography from baseline at six and 12 months. We also collected data on adverse events and quality of life (QoL). MAIN
resultsWe found eight RCTs of 1631 participants that met the inclusion criteria after independent and duplicate review of the search results. These studies took place in Europe, North America, Eastern Mediterranean region and East Asia. Included participants were adults aged 18 or over with VA of 20/40 or worse. Studies varied by duration of disease but permitted previously treated eyes as long as there was sufficient treatment-free interval. All anti-VEGF agents (bevacizumab, ranibizumab and aflibercept) and steroids (triamcinolone and dexamethasone) were included. Overall, we judged the studies to be at moderate or unclear risk of bias. Four of the eight studies did not mask participants or outcome assessors, or both. One trial compared anti-VEGF to sham. At six months, eyes receiving anti-VEGF were significantly more likely to have a gain of 15 or more ETDRS letters (risk ratio (RR) 1.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 2.49; 283 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mean VA was better in the anti-VEGF group at six months compared with control (mean difference (MD) 7.50 letters, 95% CI 5.29 to 9.71; 282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Anti-VEGF also proved more effective at reducing CRT at six months (MD -57.50 microns, 95% CI -108.63 to -6.37; 281 participants; lower CRT is better; moderate-certainty evidence). There was only very low-certainty evidence on adverse effects. There were no reports of endophthalmitis. Mean change in QoL (measured using the National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire VFQ-25) was better in people treated with anti-VEGF compared with people treated with sham (MD 7.6 higher score, 95% CI 4.3 to 10.9; 281 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Three RCTs compared anti-VEGF with macular laser (total participants = 473). The proportion of eyes gaining 15 or more letters was greater in the anti-VEGF group at six months (RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.44 to 3.05; 2 studies, 201 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mean VA in the anti-VEGF groups was better than the laser groups at six months (MD 9.63 letters, 95% CI 7.23 to 12.03; 3 studies, 473 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was a greater reduction in CRT in the anti-VEGF group compared with the laser group at six months (MD -147.47 microns, 95% CI -200.19 to -94.75; 2 studies, 201 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was only very low-certainty evidence on adverse events. There were no reports of endophthalmitis. QoL outcomes were not reported. Four studies compared anti-VEGF with intravitreal steroid (875 participants). The proportion of eyes gaining 15 or more ETDRS letters was greater in the anti-VEGF group at six months (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.10; 2 studies, 330 participants; high-certainty evidence) and 12 months (RR 1.76, 95% CI 1.36 to 2.28; 1 study, 307 participants; high-certainty evidence). Mean VA was better in the anti-VEGF group at six months (MD 8.22 letters, 95% CI 5.69 to 10.76; 2 studies, 330 participants; high-certainty evidence) and 12 months (MD 9.15 letters, 95% CI 6.32 to 11.97; 2 studies, 343 participants; high-certainty evidence). Mean CRT also showed a greater reduction in the anti-VEGF arm at 12 months compared with intravitreal steroid (MD -26.92 microns, 95% CI -65.88 to 12.04; 2 studies, 343 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). People receiving anti-VEGF showed a greater improvement in QoL at 12 months compared to those receiving steroid (MD 3.10, 95% CI 0.22 to 5.98; 1 study, 307 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Moderate-certainty evidence suggested increased risk of cataract and raised IOP with steroids. There was only very low-certainty evidence on APTC events. No cases of endophthalmitis were observed. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThe available RCT evidence suggests that treatment of MO secondary to BRVO with anti-VEGF improves visual and anatomical outcomes at six and 12 months.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.