The Experts below are selected from a list of 14442 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

C. Costagliola - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • ILM peeling in nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema: review and metanalysis
    International Ophthalmology, 2018
    Co-Authors: M. Rinaldi, R. Dell’omo, F. Morescalchi, F. Semeraro, E. Gambicorti, F. Cacciatore, F. Chiosi, C. Costagliola
    Abstract:

    Purpose To evaluate the effect of internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling during vitrectomy for nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema. Methods PUBMED, MEDLINE and CENTRAL were reviewed using the following terms (or combination of terms): Diabetic Macular Edema, nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema, internal limiting membrane peeling, vitrectomy, Müller cells. Randomized and nonrandomized studies were included. The eligible studies compared anatomical and functional outcomes of vitrectomy with or without ILM peeling for tractional and nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema. Postoperative best-corrected visual acuity and central Macular thickness were considered, respectively, the primary and secondary outcomes. Meta-analysis on mean differences between vitrectomy with and without ILM peeling was performed using inverse variance method in random effects. Results Four studies with 672 patients were eligible for analysis. No significant difference was found between postoperative best-corrected visual acuity or best-corrected visual acuity change of ILM peeling group compared with nonpeeling group. There was no significant difference in postoperative central Macular thickness and central Macular thickness reduction between the two groups. Conclusions The visual acuity outcomes in patients affected by nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema using pars plana vitrectomy with ILM peeling versus no ILM peeling were not significantly different. A larger prospective and randomized study would be necessary.

  • ILM peeling in nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema: review and metanalysis.
    International ophthalmology, 2017
    Co-Authors: M. Rinaldi, F. Morescalchi, F. Semeraro, E. Gambicorti, F. Cacciatore, F. Chiosi, Roberto Dell'omo, C. Costagliola
    Abstract:

    To evaluate the effect of internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling during vitrectomy for nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema. PUBMED, MEDLINE and CENTRAL were reviewed using the following terms (or combination of terms): Diabetic Macular Edema, nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema, internal limiting membrane peeling, vitrectomy, Muller cells. Randomized and nonrandomized studies were included. The eligible studies compared anatomical and functional outcomes of vitrectomy with or without ILM peeling for tractional and nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema. Postoperative best-corrected visual acuity and central Macular thickness were considered, respectively, the primary and secondary outcomes. Meta-analysis on mean differences between vitrectomy with and without ILM peeling was performed using inverse variance method in random effects. Four studies with 672 patients were eligible for analysis. No significant difference was found between postoperative best-corrected visual acuity or best-corrected visual acuity change of ILM peeling group compared with nonpeeling group. There was no significant difference in postoperative central Macular thickness and central Macular thickness reduction between the two groups. The visual acuity outcomes in patients affected by nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema using pars plana vitrectomy with ILM peeling versus no ILM peeling were not significantly different. A larger prospective and randomized study would be necessary.

M. Rinaldi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • ILM peeling in nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema: review and metanalysis
    International Ophthalmology, 2018
    Co-Authors: M. Rinaldi, R. Dell’omo, F. Morescalchi, F. Semeraro, E. Gambicorti, F. Cacciatore, F. Chiosi, C. Costagliola
    Abstract:

    Purpose To evaluate the effect of internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling during vitrectomy for nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema. Methods PUBMED, MEDLINE and CENTRAL were reviewed using the following terms (or combination of terms): Diabetic Macular Edema, nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema, internal limiting membrane peeling, vitrectomy, Müller cells. Randomized and nonrandomized studies were included. The eligible studies compared anatomical and functional outcomes of vitrectomy with or without ILM peeling for tractional and nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema. Postoperative best-corrected visual acuity and central Macular thickness were considered, respectively, the primary and secondary outcomes. Meta-analysis on mean differences between vitrectomy with and without ILM peeling was performed using inverse variance method in random effects. Results Four studies with 672 patients were eligible for analysis. No significant difference was found between postoperative best-corrected visual acuity or best-corrected visual acuity change of ILM peeling group compared with nonpeeling group. There was no significant difference in postoperative central Macular thickness and central Macular thickness reduction between the two groups. Conclusions The visual acuity outcomes in patients affected by nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema using pars plana vitrectomy with ILM peeling versus no ILM peeling were not significantly different. A larger prospective and randomized study would be necessary.

  • ILM peeling in nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema: review and metanalysis.
    International ophthalmology, 2017
    Co-Authors: M. Rinaldi, F. Morescalchi, F. Semeraro, E. Gambicorti, F. Cacciatore, F. Chiosi, Roberto Dell'omo, C. Costagliola
    Abstract:

    To evaluate the effect of internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling during vitrectomy for nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema. PUBMED, MEDLINE and CENTRAL were reviewed using the following terms (or combination of terms): Diabetic Macular Edema, nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema, internal limiting membrane peeling, vitrectomy, Muller cells. Randomized and nonrandomized studies were included. The eligible studies compared anatomical and functional outcomes of vitrectomy with or without ILM peeling for tractional and nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema. Postoperative best-corrected visual acuity and central Macular thickness were considered, respectively, the primary and secondary outcomes. Meta-analysis on mean differences between vitrectomy with and without ILM peeling was performed using inverse variance method in random effects. Four studies with 672 patients were eligible for analysis. No significant difference was found between postoperative best-corrected visual acuity or best-corrected visual acuity change of ILM peeling group compared with nonpeeling group. There was no significant difference in postoperative central Macular thickness and central Macular thickness reduction between the two groups. The visual acuity outcomes in patients affected by nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema using pars plana vitrectomy with ILM peeling versus no ILM peeling were not significantly different. A larger prospective and randomized study would be necessary.

Nishant Sachdev - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Efficacy and safety of topical difluprednate in persistent Diabetic Macular Edema
    International Ophthalmology, 2016
    Co-Authors: Savleen Kaur, Sonam Yangzes, Swati Singh, Nishant Sachdev
    Abstract:

    To evaluate the efficacy and safety of treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema (persistent type) with difluprednate ophthalmic emulsion 0.05 % (off label use). 20 patients with persistent Diabetic Macular Edema were enrolled. In all subjects, more than 4 months had passed since prior treatment. All patients were treated with difluprednate ophthalmic emulsion 0.05 % three times daily for 3 months. At the end of 3 months the visual acuity had increased by two lines to a mean value of 0.61 ± 0.18 on logMAR from a baseline value of 0.885 ± 0.20 and the central retinal thickness had decreased from 423 ± 72.04 microns to 345 ± 68.7 microns. Hence, there was a total of 18.4 % decrease in retinal thickness on difluprednate. Major side effects included raised intraocular pressure in 20 %. Difluprednate is a potent and strong steroid which causes a rapid decrease in persistent Diabetic Macular Edema. However, the potential side effect of raised intraocular pressure limits its use as an adjuvant therapy in non-steroid responders.

F. Morescalchi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • ILM peeling in nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema: review and metanalysis
    International Ophthalmology, 2018
    Co-Authors: M. Rinaldi, R. Dell’omo, F. Morescalchi, F. Semeraro, E. Gambicorti, F. Cacciatore, F. Chiosi, C. Costagliola
    Abstract:

    Purpose To evaluate the effect of internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling during vitrectomy for nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema. Methods PUBMED, MEDLINE and CENTRAL were reviewed using the following terms (or combination of terms): Diabetic Macular Edema, nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema, internal limiting membrane peeling, vitrectomy, Müller cells. Randomized and nonrandomized studies were included. The eligible studies compared anatomical and functional outcomes of vitrectomy with or without ILM peeling for tractional and nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema. Postoperative best-corrected visual acuity and central Macular thickness were considered, respectively, the primary and secondary outcomes. Meta-analysis on mean differences between vitrectomy with and without ILM peeling was performed using inverse variance method in random effects. Results Four studies with 672 patients were eligible for analysis. No significant difference was found between postoperative best-corrected visual acuity or best-corrected visual acuity change of ILM peeling group compared with nonpeeling group. There was no significant difference in postoperative central Macular thickness and central Macular thickness reduction between the two groups. Conclusions The visual acuity outcomes in patients affected by nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema using pars plana vitrectomy with ILM peeling versus no ILM peeling were not significantly different. A larger prospective and randomized study would be necessary.

  • ILM peeling in nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema: review and metanalysis.
    International ophthalmology, 2017
    Co-Authors: M. Rinaldi, F. Morescalchi, F. Semeraro, E. Gambicorti, F. Cacciatore, F. Chiosi, Roberto Dell'omo, C. Costagliola
    Abstract:

    To evaluate the effect of internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling during vitrectomy for nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema. PUBMED, MEDLINE and CENTRAL were reviewed using the following terms (or combination of terms): Diabetic Macular Edema, nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema, internal limiting membrane peeling, vitrectomy, Muller cells. Randomized and nonrandomized studies were included. The eligible studies compared anatomical and functional outcomes of vitrectomy with or without ILM peeling for tractional and nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema. Postoperative best-corrected visual acuity and central Macular thickness were considered, respectively, the primary and secondary outcomes. Meta-analysis on mean differences between vitrectomy with and without ILM peeling was performed using inverse variance method in random effects. Four studies with 672 patients were eligible for analysis. No significant difference was found between postoperative best-corrected visual acuity or best-corrected visual acuity change of ILM peeling group compared with nonpeeling group. There was no significant difference in postoperative central Macular thickness and central Macular thickness reduction between the two groups. The visual acuity outcomes in patients affected by nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema using pars plana vitrectomy with ILM peeling versus no ILM peeling were not significantly different. A larger prospective and randomized study would be necessary.

F. Semeraro - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • ILM peeling in nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema: review and metanalysis
    International Ophthalmology, 2018
    Co-Authors: M. Rinaldi, R. Dell’omo, F. Morescalchi, F. Semeraro, E. Gambicorti, F. Cacciatore, F. Chiosi, C. Costagliola
    Abstract:

    Purpose To evaluate the effect of internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling during vitrectomy for nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema. Methods PUBMED, MEDLINE and CENTRAL were reviewed using the following terms (or combination of terms): Diabetic Macular Edema, nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema, internal limiting membrane peeling, vitrectomy, Müller cells. Randomized and nonrandomized studies were included. The eligible studies compared anatomical and functional outcomes of vitrectomy with or without ILM peeling for tractional and nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema. Postoperative best-corrected visual acuity and central Macular thickness were considered, respectively, the primary and secondary outcomes. Meta-analysis on mean differences between vitrectomy with and without ILM peeling was performed using inverse variance method in random effects. Results Four studies with 672 patients were eligible for analysis. No significant difference was found between postoperative best-corrected visual acuity or best-corrected visual acuity change of ILM peeling group compared with nonpeeling group. There was no significant difference in postoperative central Macular thickness and central Macular thickness reduction between the two groups. Conclusions The visual acuity outcomes in patients affected by nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema using pars plana vitrectomy with ILM peeling versus no ILM peeling were not significantly different. A larger prospective and randomized study would be necessary.

  • ILM peeling in nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema: review and metanalysis.
    International ophthalmology, 2017
    Co-Authors: M. Rinaldi, F. Morescalchi, F. Semeraro, E. Gambicorti, F. Cacciatore, F. Chiosi, Roberto Dell'omo, C. Costagliola
    Abstract:

    To evaluate the effect of internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling during vitrectomy for nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema. PUBMED, MEDLINE and CENTRAL were reviewed using the following terms (or combination of terms): Diabetic Macular Edema, nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema, internal limiting membrane peeling, vitrectomy, Muller cells. Randomized and nonrandomized studies were included. The eligible studies compared anatomical and functional outcomes of vitrectomy with or without ILM peeling for tractional and nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema. Postoperative best-corrected visual acuity and central Macular thickness were considered, respectively, the primary and secondary outcomes. Meta-analysis on mean differences between vitrectomy with and without ILM peeling was performed using inverse variance method in random effects. Four studies with 672 patients were eligible for analysis. No significant difference was found between postoperative best-corrected visual acuity or best-corrected visual acuity change of ILM peeling group compared with nonpeeling group. There was no significant difference in postoperative central Macular thickness and central Macular thickness reduction between the two groups. The visual acuity outcomes in patients affected by nontractional Diabetic Macular Edema using pars plana vitrectomy with ILM peeling versus no ILM peeling were not significantly different. A larger prospective and randomized study would be necessary.