ReviewCureus2024
Efficacy and Safety of Laser Therapy on Ischemic Central Retinal Vein Occlusion: A Systematic Review and Analysis of Clinical Studies.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recent advances in the treatment of retinal vein occlusion with traditional Chinese medicine.International ophthalmology · 2025Review
- Current Understanding of Retinal Vein Thrombosis in Older Adults: A Review of the Literature.Clinical interventions in aging · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many studies have evaluated different treatments for ischemic central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO). Nevertheless, improvement and complication rates vary significantly. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of laser therapy in treating ischemic CRVO compared with a control group using other treatments. The databases of PubMed, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched using a variety of keywords, including "ischemic central retinal vein occlusion," "CRVO," "laser," and "panretinal photocoagulation." After data extraction, each study's quality was assessed using the methodological index for nonrandomized studies (MINORS) or grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation or GRADE standards. A sum of 195 abstracts were reviewed, and seven clinical trials were eventually chosen. Of these, four were prospective studies, two were randomized controlled studies, and only one was a retrospective study. The assessment of potential biases in our included studies revealed that all these studies demonstrated moderate or high quality. Two studies were selected for meta-analysis, and the results showed no significant difference in visual acuity (VA) outcomes between the treated and the control groups (P = 0.17). In the remaining five studies, laser therapy was found to be more effective at neovascular complications, with a higher rate of neovascular glaucoma (NVG), iris neovascularization (NVI), neovascularisation at disc (NVD), and retinal neovascularization in the group without laser treatments. This review suggests that laser therapy is essential in preventing neovascular complications, such as NVG, NVI, NVD, and retinal neovascularization rather than improving VA. In addition, the combination of laser photocoagulation and intravitreal injection (IVI) improved VA, but further studies are required.
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.