Observational studyEye (London, England)2026
Use of intravitreal fluocinolone acetonide implant in inflammatory macular oedema.
Observational study in Eye (London, England), 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesTo assess the effectiveness and safety of 0.19-mg fluocinolone acetonide implant (FAc-implant) in inflammatory macular oedema (MO). SUBJECTS/
methodsThis observational, retrospective, multicentre cohort included consecutive eyes treated with FAc-implant between June 2020 and January 2024 for recurrent uveitic or postoperative MO requiring at least two prior dexamethasone-implants (DEX-implants) and ≥6 months of follow-up. The primary endpoints were best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. The secondary endpoints were anatomical and functional outcomes, additional treatments and safety outcomes (intraocular pressure (IOP), ocular hypertension (OHT)).
resultsA total of 73 eyes were included, with a mean follow-up of 16.8 (8.4) months. The median difference in BCVA was +4.0 [0.0;10.0] (p < 0.001), +2.0 [0.0;9.0] (p = 0.006), +5.0 [0.0;10.0] (p = 0.010) and +5.0 [0.0;9.0] (p = 0.043) letters at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months. The median difference in CMT was -71.0 [-181.3;-25.5] (p < 0.001), -71.0 [-195.0;-30.5] (p < 0.001), -75.0 [194.0;-43.0] (p < 0.001) and -154.0 [-253.0;-110.0] (p < 0.001) μm at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months. Over the follow-up, 38 eyes (52.1%) did not require any additional intravitreal treatment. At 12 months after FAc-implant, the probability of not receiving a rescue injection of DEX-implant was 54.0% [43.0%;67.0%]. Eight eyes (11.0%) developed OHT (IOP ≥ 25 mmHg or an increase in IOP ≥ 10 mmHg), mostly resolved by IOP-lowering eye drops; two eyes required surgery.
conclusionsThis real-life study shows the functional and anatomical effectiveness of the FAcimplant in recurrent inflammatory MO, with limited adverse effects and a reduced treatment burden.
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.