Hypotensive efficacy of topical brimonidine for intraocular pressure spikes following intravitreal injections of antivascular endothelial growth factor agents: a randomised crossover trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the effect of topical brimonidine tartrate prophylaxis on intraocular pressure (IOP) spikes following intravitreal injection of antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents. METHODS: This is a randomised crossover trial of consecutive non-glaucomatous eyes receiving intravitreal anti-VEGF injections between December 2016 and July 2017. All eyes were randomly assigned to no prophylaxis or topical brimonidine tartrate 0.15 % administered 20 min prior to injection in one of two consecutive visits. Measurements of IOP were obtained immediately (T0), 10 min (T10) and 20 min (T20) after injection during the visits with and without prophylaxis. RESULTS: Among the 58 eyes of 55 patients (116 visits), the mean (SD) age was 74.3 (11.6), and 62% were female. The mean baseline IOP was 15.3 (2.3) mm Hg (range: 11-20). On average, the immediate postinjection IOP during the visit without prophylaxis was 41.6 (12) mm Hg (range: 17-81). Compared with no prophylaxis, the visit with preadministered topical brimonidine tartrate had a lower IOP at T0 (p<0.001), T10 (p=0.001) and T20 (p=0.043), and a smaller proportion of eyes with IOP elevation of greater than 20 mm Hg from preinjection (p=0.002) and IOP greater than 50 mm Hg at T0 (p=0.036). Without prophylaxis, two eyes (two patients) had an IOP of greater than 70 mm Hg at T0 and thus underwent anterior chamber paracentesis. CONCLUSION: Topical brimonidine tartrate prophylaxis for intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF agents effectively reduces IOP spikes in non-glaucomatous eyes and may be easily incorporated into ophthalmologists' current practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03513172.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".