SynthesisFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Efficacy and safety of different anti-VEGF agents combined with pars plana vitrectomy in proliferative diabetic retinopathy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Frontiers in endocrinology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of different anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents in combination with pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for the treatment of proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR), in order to guide clinical decision-making. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to November 1, 2025. The outcomes assessed included intraoperative bleeding rate, postoperative vitreous hemorrhage rate, changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), incidence of iatrogenic retinal breaks, reoperation rate, and the duration of surgery. A network meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab (IVB), ranibizumab (IVR), conbercept (IVC), and aflibercept (IVA) in combination with PPV. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tool, and the quality of evidence was graded using the GRADE framework. This study was registered with the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD420251251306). Results: A total of 22 RCTs involving 1, 388 patients (1, 416 eyes) and five treatment regimens were included. Compared with PPV alone, all anti-VEGF agents significantly reduced the risk of intraoperative bleeding, as indicated by 95% confidence intervals (CIs) not crossing the null value of 1. IVR demonstrated the most favorable outcome (OR = 0.03, 95% CI: 0-0.44; SUCRA = 86.1%). For preventing postoperative vitreous hemorrhage, IVA was the most effective (OR = 0.19, 95% CI: 0.05-0.66; SUCRA = 73%), followed by IVC (OR = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.13-0.49) and IVB (OR = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.17-0.53). Regarding postoperative visual improvement, IVC showed the most favorable trend (MD=-0.72, 95% CI: -1.64 to 0.20; SUCRA = 85.2%). IVB significantly shortened the duration of surgery (MD=-19.96, 95% CI: -29.09 to -10.82; SUCRA = 93.5%) and reduced reoperation rate (OR = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.21-0.63; SUCRA = 90.8%). IVR was the most effective in reducing iatrogenic retinal breaks (OR = 0.08, 95% CI: 0.01-0.52; SUCRA = 83.9%). Conclusions: Different anti-VEGF agents demonstrate distinct advantages during the perioperative period of PDR. IVR and IVC excel in controlling intraoperative and postoperative bleeding, IVB is the most efficient in improving surgical efficiency, and IVC shows the greatest potential for vision improvement. Clinical decisions should be based on individualized treatment goals. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251251306, identifier CRD420251251306.
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.