Definition and research guide
This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.
Content available: 4 complete abstracts (837 words), 10 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.
Definition
Fluid accumulation in the outer layer of the macula lutea that results from intraocular or systemic insults. It may develop in a diffuse pattern where the macula appears thickened or it may acquire the characteristic petaloid appearance referred to as cystoid macular edema. Although macular edema may be associated with various underlying conditions, it is most commonly seen following intraocular surgery, venous occlusive disease, diabetic retinopathy, and posterior segment inflammatory disease. (From Survey of Ophthalmology 2004; 49(5) 470-90)
Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.
Also known as: Edema, Macular; Macular Edema, Cystoid; Edema, Cystoid Macular; Cystoid Macular Dystrophy; Central Retinal Edema, Cystoid; Cystoid Macular Edema; Macular Dystrophy, Dominant Cystoid; Irvine-Gass Syndrome.
Where it fits in the MeSH classification
- Broader topics
- Macular Degeneration
Related concepts
- Macula Lutea
- Diabetic Retinopathy
Research landscape
PubMed indexes 10,325 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Macular Edema” (counts retrieved 2026-11-04). 3,251 of them (31.5%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is 2010-2019 with 4,461 records.
Reviews account for 1,241 records (12.0%) and meta-analyses for 209. Randomized controlled trials number 910 (8.8%) as a share of all records on the topic. Randomized trials make up a comparatively large share of this literature, which means many treatment questions have been tested directly.
Show the data
| Period | Records |
|---|---|
| through 1999 | 641 |
| 2000-2009 | 1,972 |
| 2010-2019 | 4,461 |
| 2020 onward | 3,251 |
Publication-type chart data
| Type | Records | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews | 1,241 | 12.0% |
| Meta-analyses | 209 | 2.0% |
| Randomized controlled trials | 910 | 8.8% |
Method: PubMed query "Macular Edema"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-11-04.
Reading the evidence in eye, ear, nose and throat
Eye, hearing, nose and throat studies rely on specialist tests (visual acuity, eye pressure, audiograms, scopes) and on patient-reported symptoms, which vary between people and with age. Some conditions improve without treatment, so comparison groups matter. Nothing on this page is advice about diagnosis or treatment; sudden loss of sight or hearing needs urgent care from a qualified clinician. Check how the outcome was tested, the age of the people studied and how long they were followed.
Evidence from open-access studies
These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.
Real-world six-month outcomes in patients switched to faricimab following partial response to anti-VEGF therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration and diabetic macular oedema [1]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- BackgroundLandmark studies reported on faricimab efficacy and safety predominantly in treatment naïve patients, but outcomes following switch from other anti-VEGF therapies are lacking.
- Closing excerpt
- Ongoing review of real-world data will inform longer-term outcomes of safety and effectiveness.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (173 words)
BackgroundLandmark studies reported on faricimab efficacy and safety predominantly in treatment naïve patients, but outcomes following switch from other anti-VEGF therapies are lacking. We evaluated patients switched to faricimab who had previously shown a partial response to other anti-VEGF injections for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) and diabetic macular oedema (DMO).MethodsRetrospective study at the Oxford Eye Hospital. Patients switched to faricimab from January to April 2023 with six months follow-up were identified via electronic medical records.ResultsA total of 116 patients (151 eyes) were included. In 88 patients with nAMD (107 eyes), mean visual acuity remained stable: 62±17 ETDRS letters at baseline; 62±18 at six months (p > 0.05). Central subfield thickness (CST) reduced from 294 ± 73 μm to 270 ± 53 μm (p 0.05). CST reduced from 355 ± 87 μm to 317 ± 82 μm (p ConclusionsSwitching to faricimab in treatment resistant eyes led to improved anatomical response and extended treatment interval in a significant proportion of patients. Ongoing review of real-world data will inform longer-term outcomes of safety and effectiveness.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 39394370 · DOI · PMC11621343
Faricimab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration and diabetic macular edema: from preclinical studies to phase 3 outcomes [2]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy is the standard of care for diabetic macular edema (DME) and neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD); however, vision gains and anatomical improvements are not sustained over longer periods of treatment, suggesting other relevant targets may be needed to optimize treatments.
- Closing excerpt
- Current evidence suggests that dual inhibition with faricimab heralds the beginning of multitargeted treatment strategies inhibiting multiple, independent components of retinal pathology, with faricimab providing opportunities to reduce treatment burden and improve outcomes compared with anti-VEGF monotherapy.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (347 words)
Intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy is the standard of care for diabetic macular edema (DME) and neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD); however, vision gains and anatomical improvements are not sustained over longer periods of treatment, suggesting other relevant targets may be needed to optimize treatments. Additionally, frequent intravitreal injections can prove a burden for patients and caregivers. Angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2) has been explored as an additional therapeutic target, due to the involvement of Ang-2 in DME and nAMD pathogenesis. Recent evidence supports the hypothesis that targeting both VEGF and Ang-2 may improve clinical outcomes in DME and nAMD compared with targeting VEGF alone by enhancing vascular stability, resulting in reduced macular leakage, prevention of neovascularization, and diminished inflammation. Faricimab, a novel bispecific antibody that targets VEGF-A and Ang-2, has been evaluated in clinical trials for DME (YOSEMITE/RHINE) and nAMD (TENAYA/LUCERNE). These trials evaluated faricimab against the anti-VEGFA/B and anti-placental growth factor fusion protein aflibercept, both administered by intravitreal injection. In addition to faricimab efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics, durability was evaluated during the trials using a treat-and-extend regimen. At 1 year, faricimab demonstrated non-inferior vision gains versus aflibercept across YOSEMITE/RHINE and TENAYA/LUCERNE. In YOSEMITE/RHINE, faricimab improved anatomic parameters versus aflibercept. Reduction of central subfield thickness (CST), and absence of both DME and intraretinal fluid were greater in faricimab- versus aflibercept-treated eyes. In TENAYA/LUCERNE, CST reductions were greater for faricimab than aflibercept at the end of the head-to-head phase (0-12 weeks), and were comparable with aflibercept at year 1, but with less frequent dosing. CST and vision gains were maintained during year 2 of both YOSEMITE/RHINE and TENAYA/LUCERNE. These findings suggest that dual Ang-2/VEGF-A pathway inhibition may result in greater disease control versus anti-VEGF alone, potentially addressing the unmet needs and reducing treatment burden, and improving real-world outcomes and compliance in retinal vascular diseases. Long-term extension studies (RHONE-X, AVONELLE-X) are ongoing. Current evidence suggests that dual inhibition with faricimab heralds the beginning of multitargeted treatment strategies inhibiting multiple, independent components of retinal pathology, with faricimab providing opportunities to reduce treatment burden and improve outcomes compared with anti-VEGF monotherapy.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 38847896 · DOI · PMC11584429
Explainable ensemble learning method for OCT detection with transfer learning [3]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- The accuracy and interpretability of artificial intelligence (AI) are crucial for the advancement of optical coherence tomography (OCT) image detection, as it can greatly reduce the manual labor required by clinicians.
- Closing excerpt
- It is demonstrated that the proposed approach could have good performance of both accuracy and interpretability in retinal OCT image detection.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (212 words)
The accuracy and interpretability of artificial intelligence (AI) are crucial for the advancement of optical coherence tomography (OCT) image detection, as it can greatly reduce the manual labor required by clinicians. By prioritizing these aspects during development and application, we can make significant progress towards streamlining the clinical workflow. In this paper, we propose an explainable ensemble approach that utilizes transfer learning to detect fundus lesion diseases through OCT imaging. Our study utilized a publicly available OCT dataset consisting of normal subjects, patients with dry age-related macular degeneration (AMD), and patients with diabetic macular edema (DME), each with 15 samples. The impact of pre-trained weights on the performance of individual networks was first compared, and then these networks were ensemble using majority soft polling. Finally, the features learned by the networks were visualized using Grad-CAM and CAM. The use of pre-trained ImageNet weights improved the performance from 68.17% to 92.89%. The ensemble model consisting of the three CNN models with pre-trained parameters loaded performed best, correctly distinguishing between AMD patients, DME patients and normal subjects 100% of the time. Visualization results showed that Grad-CAM could display the lesion area more accurately. It is demonstrated that the proposed approach could have good performance of both accuracy and interpretability in retinal OCT image detection.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 38517913 · DOI · PMC10959366
Treatment patterns and long-term outcomes in anti-VEGF-treated macular oedema secondary to retinal vein occlusion: a retrospective observational study [4]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Background/objectivesThis study reported real-world visual acuity (VA), treatment patterns, and ocular safety outcomes from patients with macular oedema secondary to branch, central, or hemi-retinal vein occlusion (BRVO, CRVO, HRVO) treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF).
- Closing excerpt
- Results3511/3465 eyes/patients with BRVO and 3568/3514 eyes/patients with CRVO or HRVO were included; ConclusionsVA improvements were observed soon after anti-VEGF treatment, but were lower with longer follow-up through 60 months, alongside lower annual injection numbers, suggesting that current single-target intravitreal anti-VEGFs may not be sufficiently durable for long-term RVO management in routine practice.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (105 words)
Background/objectivesThis study reported real-world visual acuity (VA), treatment patterns, and ocular safety outcomes from patients with macular oedema secondary to branch, central, or hemi-retinal vein occlusion (BRVO, CRVO, HRVO) treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF).MethodsData were collected from Medisoft electronic medical records across 16 NHS ophthalmology sites in England over 60 months.Results3511/3465 eyes/patients with BRVO and 3568/3514 eyes/patients with CRVO or HRVO were included; ConclusionsVA improvements were observed soon after anti-VEGF treatment, but were lower with longer follow-up through 60 months, alongside lower annual injection numbers, suggesting that current single-target intravitreal anti-VEGFs may not be sufficiently durable for long-term RVO management in routine practice.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 41238745 · DOI · PMC12764885
Key reviews and meta-analyses
The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.
- Research article Diabetic Macular Edema: Current Understanding, Molecular Mechanisms and Therapeutic Implications [5]
- Research article A Global Assessment of Eye Health and Quality of Life: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews [6]
- Research article Systemic Safety of Prolonged Monthly Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapy for Diabetic Macular Edema: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis [7]
- Research article Diabetic macular edema: Evidence-based management [8]
- Research article Optical coherence tomography angiography in diabetic retinopathy [9]
- Research article Faricimab: First Approval [10]
Full-text reviews on EvidenceLib
Open-access review articles about this topic, reproduced in full with authors, licence and references.
Topical Treatment for Retinal Degenerative Pathologies: A Systematic Review
Lăcrămioara Samoilă, Oliviu Voștinaru, Elena Dinte et al. · International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2023 · CC BY 4.0
References
- Borchert GA, Kiire CA, Stone NM, Akil H, Gkika T, Fischer MD, et al.. Real-world six-month outcomes in patients switched to faricimab following partial response to anti-VEGF therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration and diabetic macular oedema. . 2024. PMID 39394370 · DOI · PMC11621343
- Agostini H, Abreu F, Baumal CR, Chang DS, G Csaky K, Demetriades AM, et al.. Faricimab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration and diabetic macular edema: from preclinical studies to phase 3 outcomes. . 2024. PMID 38847896 · DOI · PMC11584429
- Yang J, Wang G, Xiao X, Bao M, Tian G. Explainable ensemble learning method for OCT detection with transfer learning. . 2024. PMID 38517913 · DOI · PMC10959366
- Dinah C, Dodds M, Lotery A, Salvatore S, Fletcher E, Lake AVR, et al.. Treatment patterns and long-term outcomes in anti-VEGF-treated macular oedema secondary to retinal vein occlusion: a retrospective observational study. . 2026. PMID 41238745 · DOI · PMC12764885
- Zhang J, Zhang J, Zhang C, Zhang J, Gu L, Luo D, et al.. Diabetic Macular Edema: Current Understanding, Molecular Mechanisms and Therapeutic Implications. Cells. 2022. PMID 36359761 · DOI · PMC9655436
- Assi L, Chamseddine F, Ibrahim P, Sabbagh H, Rosman L, Congdon N, et al.. A Global Assessment of Eye Health and Quality of Life: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2021. PMID 33576772 · DOI · PMC7881366
- Avery RL, Gordon GM. Systemic Safety of Prolonged Monthly Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapy for Diabetic Macular Edema: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2016. PMID 26513684 · DOI
- Browning DJ, Stewart MW, Lee C. Diabetic macular edema: Evidence-based management. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2018. PMID 30451174 · DOI · PMC6256891
- Waheed NK, Rosen RB, Jia Y, Munk MR, Huang D, Fawzi A, et al.. Optical coherence tomography angiography in diabetic retinopathy. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2023. PMID 37499857 · DOI · PMC11268430
- Shirley M. Faricimab: First Approval. Drugs. 2022. PMID 35474059 · DOI
About this article
- Sources
- NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
- Verification
- Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-11-04; title, year and DOI matched.
- Review state
- automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
- Version
- 1, last updated 2026-11-04.
See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.
Evidence strength
EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.