ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2024
Impact of Aflibercept vs Dexamethasone Treatment on Epiretinal Membrane Formation in Eyes with Diabetic Macular Edema.
Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Treatment-Emergent Epiretinal Membrane in Diabetic Macular Edema: A Real-World OCT-Based Comparative Pharmacotherapy Study Across Intravitreal Agents-The TRIDENT-DME Study.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to investigate the impact of aflibercept and dexamethasone (DEX) on the formation of epiretinal membrane (ERM) and their treatment outcomes in eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME).
methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, medical records of 124 eyes from 429 patients diagnosed with DME were reviewed between June 2017 and June 2019. Patients were categorized into two groups: the aflibercept group (67 eyes) and the DEX group (57 eyes). The primary endpoint was the secondary ERM incidence following intravitreal treatments and its correlation across different medications. Secondary endpoints included longitudinal changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT).
resultsOver a 24-month follow-up, eyes treated with DEX had approximately a fourfold higher incidence of ERM development compared to aflibercept [hazard ratio (HR) = 3.97, p = 0.02]. These eyes also showed worse BCVA (p = 0.059) and increased CMT (p = 0.004), despite requiring fewer total injections (p = 0.000) in the survival analysis model. The cumulative probability of ERM formation was 13.7%. Additionally, DME eyes exhibited poor functional and anatomical outcomes after developing ERM, while age, A1c level, DR severity, initial BCVA and CMT, lens status, and previous laser treatment were not associated with an elevated incidence of ERM formation.
conclusionIntravitreal DEX implantation in DME eyes resulted in a higher incidence of secondary ERM formation compared to aflibercept over a 2-year period. The therapeutic efficacy for DME was diminished following ERM development, leading to worse anatomical outcomes. New therapeutic approaches should be explored to prevent ERM formation while maintaining both anatomical and functional outcomes in DME treatment.
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.