Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Unit-based evaluation of retinopathy of prematurity screening practices in Turkiye within the framework of current guidelines.

Created on 22 Sep 2026

Authors

Firangiz Nergiz Mehralizada, Ömer Erdeve, Yasemin Ezgi Köstekci, Ferhan Demirtaş, Feyza Çalış Karanfil, Pınar Bingöl Kızıltunç, Emel Okulu, Fatma Begüm Atasay, Huban Atilla, Saadet Arsan

Published in

International ophthalmology. Volume 46. Issue 1. Sep 21, 2026. Epub Sep 21, 2026.

Abstract

To describe a unit-based experience with expanded retinopathy of prematurity screening criteria for infants born between 32 and 34 weeks' gestation, in relation to current national and international guidelines.
This retrospective study included 425 preterm screened for ROP. Infants were divided into groups based on the presence or absence of ROP and the need for treatment. The population was further categorized by guideline periods (2016 vs. 2021) for a comparative analysis.
The mean birth weight of the cohort was 1560 g, and the mean gestational age was 31.3 weeks. Any stage of ROP was diagnosed in 21.2% of infants, with only 2.3% requiring treatment. No treatment-requiring ROP occurred in infants born at ≥30 weeks of gestation. Independent risk factors for ROP were BW < 1500 g (OR:7.29), patent ductus arteriosus (OR:2.17), and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (OR:3.89). The incidence of ROP decreased significantly over the study period.
Our findings support a more targeted screening approach in well-equipped, high-level NICUs, where local data suggests a lower risk of severe ROP in more mature infants. These results highlight the importance of unit-based monitoring and population-specific screening criteria to reduce unnecessary examinations while ensuring comprehensive coverage of high-risk infants.

PMID:
42766227
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 22 Sep 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 12
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement