Comparative effectiveness and safety of adjunctive methotrexate in rhegmatogenous retinal detachment complicated by or at high risk for proliferative vitreoretinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Purpose To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adjunctive methotrexate (MTX) in vitreoretinal surgery for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) complicated by or at high risk for proliferative vitreoretinopathy (PVR). Methods This PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO CRD420261281220) searched PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and Web of Science through October 16, 2025. Randomized trials, comparative observational studies, and case series were included. Comparative and single-arm data were analyzed separately using random-effects models. Primary outcomes were final retinal reattachment and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA); postoperative PVR and adverse events were secondary outcomes. Results Sixteen reports met the eligibility criteria, with 14 unique studies contributing to quantitative synthesis. MTX was associated with a lower risk of postoperative PVR (6 studies; 131 MTX vs. 138 controls; RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.40–0.77; p = 0.004; I²=0%) and better BCVA in the primary analysis (MD − 0.20 logMAR, 95% CI − 0.34 to − 0.06; I²=12.3%), but not with improved final retinal reattachment (8 studies; 215 MTX vs. 207 controls; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.90–1.28; p = 0.412; I²=56.7%). However, the association with better BCVA was attenuated and no longer statistically significant after studies at critical risk of bias were excluded. Single-arm analyses yielded a pooled reattachment rate of 80% (95% CI 75–85%) and postoperative PVR rate of 22% (95% CI 15–31%). Adverse events were predominantly mild, reversible corneal complications, reported mainly with repeated MTX injections. Certainty of evidence was very low across major efficacy outcomes. Conclusions Adjunctive MTX was associated with reduced postoperative PVR but not with improved final retinal reattachment. Although the primary analysis suggested modestly better postoperative BCVA, this finding was not robust to the exclusion of studies at critical risk of bias. Given the very low certainty of evidence, these findings are hypothesis-generating rather than practice-changing. Larger randomized trials with standardized MTX regimens and outcome definitions are needed.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Retina and Vitreous
Published
2026-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40942-026-00947-7
Primary Topic
Retinal and Macular Surgery
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Comparative effectiveness and safety of adjunctive methotrexate in rhegmatogenous retinal detachment complicated by or at high risk for proliferative vitreoretinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Lúcio Roberto Cançado Castellano, Carlos Augusto Moreira Neto, Maurício Maia, Tiago Nelson de Oliveira Rassi et al.
International Journal of Retina and Vitreous
Retinal and Macular Surgery
article

Comparative effectiveness and safety of adjunctive methotrexate in rhegmatogenous retinal detachment complicated by or at high risk for proliferative vitreoretinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Lúcio Roberto Cançado Castellano, Carlos Augusto Moreira Neto, Maurício Maia, Tiago Nelson de Oliveira Rassi, Gabrielle de Lacerda Dantas Henrique, Neeran Narainswami, João Guilherme Gomes Pedrosa, Renata Ramos Stropp, Lucas Valadão de Brito Soares, Michel Eid Farah
article en

Abstract

Abstract Purpose To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adjunctive methotrexate (MTX) in vitreoretinal surgery for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) complicated by or at high risk for proliferative vitreoretinopathy (PVR). Methods This PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO CRD420261281220) searched PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and Web of Science through October 16, 2025. Randomized trials, comparative observational studies, and case series were included. Comparative and single-arm data were analyzed separately using random-effects models. Primary outcomes were final retinal reattachment and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA); postoperative PVR and adverse events were secondary outcomes. Results Sixteen reports met the eligibility criteria, with 14 unique studies contributing to quantitative synthesis. MTX was associated with a lower risk of postoperative PVR (6 studies; 131 MTX vs. 138 controls; RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.40–0.77; p = 0.004; I²=0%) and better BCVA in the primary analysis (MD − 0.20 logMAR, 95% CI − 0.34 to − 0.06; I²=12.3%), but not with improved final retinal reattachment (8 studies; 215 MTX vs. 207 controls; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.90–1.28; p = 0.412; I²=56.7%). However, the association with better BCVA was attenuated and no longer statistically significant after studies at critical risk of bias were excluded. Single-arm analyses yielded a pooled reattachment rate of 80% (95% CI 75–85%) and postoperative PVR rate of 22% (95% CI 15–31%). Adverse events were predominantly mild, reversible corneal complications, reported mainly with repeated MTX injections. Certainty of evidence was very low across major efficacy outcomes. Conclusions Adjunctive MTX was associated with reduced postoperative PVR but not with improved final retinal reattachment. Although the primary analysis suggested modestly better postoperative BCVA, this finding was not robust to the exclusion of studies at critical risk of bias. Given the very low certainty of evidence, these findings are hypothesis-generating rather than practice-changing. Larger randomized trials with standardized MTX regimens and outcome definitions are needed.

International Journal of Retina and Vitreous
Universidade Federal da Paraíba (BR), Groote Schuur Hospital (ZA), Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital (ZA), Universidade Federal de São Paulo (BR)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Retinal and Macular Surgery
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.