ArticleScientific reports2024
Subretinal fluid in macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differential efficacy of Conbercept vs. Ranibizumab on retinal microstructural changes in macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion during the loading phase.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- The Clinical Significance of Imaging Biomarkers Discoverable by Anomaly Detection Methods in Retinal Diseases: A Review.Journal of ophthalmology · 2026Review
- 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
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
Abstract
We identified characteristics of patients with subretinal fluid (SRF) in macular edema (ME) secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) and determined their clinical outcomes after anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment. Fifty-seven eyes of BRVO patients with ME were divided into two groups according to the presence or absence of SRF at diagnosis. We compared the aqueous profiles, ocular and systemic characteristics at baseline, and the clinical outcomes. The SRF group had significantly greater central subfield thickness (CST) values and poorer best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at baseline compared to the non-SRF group. The former group had significantly higher aqueous levels of interleukin-8, VEGF, and placental growth factor. CST reduction and BCVA improvement during treatment were significantly greater in the SRF group than in the non-SRF group. Consequently, CST values were significantly lower in the SRF group than in the non-SRF group at 12 months, when BCVA did not differ significantly between the two groups. The SRF group required more frequent anti-VEGF treatment over 12 months and exhibited a higher rate of macular atrophy. Based on the aqueous profiles and the number of treatments required, the presence of SRF in BRVO patients appears to be associated with higher disease activity.
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.