ArticleCureus2025
Comparison of Choroidal Thickness in Affected and Fellow Eyes of Treatment-Naive Retinal Vein Occlusion Patients.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe primary purpose of the study was to compare the baseline choroidal thickness (CT) between affected eyes and fellow eyes of treatment-naive retinal vein occlusion (RVO) patients by spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). The secondary purpose of the study was to find any association between presenting visual acuity and CT in the affected eyes of treatment-naive RVO patients.
methodsThis was a comparative, cross-sectional study. A total of 68 eyes of 34 treatment-naive RVO patients in the age group of 40-60 years were prospectively included in the study. Individuals with refractive error beyond ±6 D and posterior segment pathology other than RVO were excluded. The baseline axial length and intraocular pressure of the affected and fellow eyes were taken into consideration so that these parameters do not have any effect on the CT. The CT at the subfoveal region, at a distance of 500 µm nasal and 500 µm temporal to the fovea, was measured on SD-OCT with enhanced depth imaging (EDI) mode.
resultsThe CT at all locations was significantly higher in the affected eyes of RVO patients (sub-foveal, 500 µm nasal, 500 µm temporal, and mean CT: 326.1 ± 80.0 µm, 325.4 ± 99.7 µm, 328.1 ± 100.8 µm, and 326.5 ± 87.8 µm, respectively) compared to the fellow eyes (sub-foveal, 500 µm nasal, 500 µm temporal, and mean CT: 264.2 ± 69.2 µm, 263.1 ± 69.5 µm, 255.2 ± 72.6 µm, and 260.8 ± 68.5 µm, respectively). The presenting visual acuity (in LogMAR) did not show a statistically significant correlation with CT (p = 0.404).
conclusionThe study demonstrated that although CT was increased in RVO patients, it did not have any significant association with presenting visual acuity in the affected eyes of RVO patients.
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.