SynthesisBMC ophthalmology2026
Direct randomized evidence comparing ranibizumab and bevacizumab for macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC ophthalmology, 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
backgroundIntravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy is the first-line treatment for macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion. However, direct comparative evidence between ranibizumab and bevacizumab from randomized controlled trials remains limited. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of these two agents using evidence from randomized controlled trials.
methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from database inception to February 11, 2026. Eligible studies were published randomized controlled trials directly comparing intravitreal ranibizumab and bevacizumab monotherapy in adults with RVO-ME. Nonrandomized and noncomparative studies were excluded.
resultsFour randomized controlled trials involving 759 participants were included. At 6 months, no significant difference was observed in mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) change (MD 0.61 letters, 95% CI -1.95 to 3.18). The pooled mean difference in central macular thickness (CMT) change was 1.52 μm (95% CI -237.41 to 240.46). The proportion of eyes gaining ≥ 15 ETDRS letters was comparable (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.14). Safety profiles were broadly similar. Rare systemic events were infrequent and associated with considerable statistical uncertainty. Certainty of evidence was moderate for visual outcomes and low to very low for rare adverse events.
conclusionRanibizumab and bevacizumab show comparable short-term efficacy and safety for macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion, although evidence for rare systemic events remains uncertain. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
trial registrationPROSPERO CRD420251172336.
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.