-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2023Macular holes cause severe impairment of sight. With the aim of improving the outcome of surgery for macular holes, particularly larger macular holes (those measuring... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Macular holes cause severe impairment of sight. With the aim of improving the outcome of surgery for macular holes, particularly larger macular holes (those measuring over 400 μm), a variable period of face-down positioning may be advised. This review is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2011.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effect of postoperative face-down positioning on the outcome of surgery for macular hole.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2022, Issue 5), which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, the ISRCTN registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. There were no date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 25 May 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which postoperative face-down positioning was compared to no face-down positioning following surgery for macular holes. The primary outcome of interest was closure of the macular hole. Other outcomes of interest included visual outcomes, quality of life outcomes, and the occurrence of adverse events. Pairs of review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and evaluated the certainty of evidence using GRADE.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We analysed dichotomous data as risk ratios (RRs), and continuous data as mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The unit of analysis was eyes.
MAIN RESULTS
We included eight studies allocating a total of 709 eyes (699 participants). There was heterogeneity in study design, including the control group treatment (from no positioning to strict maintenance of other 'face-forward' postures) and surgical procedures (with or without inner limiting membrane peeling, with or without cataract surgery). There were also different durations of positioning, with two studies using 3 days, two studies using 5 days, and three studies using 10 days of face-down positioning. Whilst the overall risk of bias was low, all included studies were judged to be at high or unclear risk of bias due to absence of assessment of adherence to the 'prescribed' intervention of face-down positioning or posturing. The primary outcome of successful anatomical hole closure at one to six months following surgery was reported in 95 of every 100 eyes of participants advised to position face-down for at least three days after surgery, and in 85 of every 100 eyes of participants not advised to position face-down (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.12, 709 eyes, 8 studies, I² = 44%). Amongst the 327 eyes of participants with macular holes of at least 400 μm, hole closure was noted in 94 of every 100 eyes of participants advised to position face-down, and in 84 of every 100 eyes of participants not advised to position face-down (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.26, 5 studies, I² = 62%). Amongst the 129 eyes of participants with macular holes of less than 400 μm, hole closure was noted in 100 of every 100 eyes of participants advised to position face-down, and in 96 of every 100 eyes of participants not advised to position face-down (RR 1.03, CI 0.97 to 1.11, 4 studies, I² = 0%). The certainty of the evidence was low, downgraded for imprecision (CIs including no effect) and study design limitations (with different durations of face-down posturing used in the absence of a dose-response gradient, and limitations in measuring the exposure). Meta-analysis of visual acuity data was challenging given the use of different definitions of postoperative visual outcome across studies. Three studies reported findings by gain in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters (MD 2.04, 95% CI -0.01 to 4.09, very low-certainty evidence). Meta-analyses of quality of life data were not possible because of inconsistency in outcome metrics across studies. One study reported no difference between groups in quality of life, as reported on a validated quality of life metric scale (the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire - 25 (NEI VFQ-25), between face-down positioning for five days and non-face-down positioning (median NEI VFQ-25 score was 89 (interquartile range (IQR) 76 to 94) in the face-down group versus 87 (IQR 73 to 93) in the non-face-down group (adjusted mean difference on a logistic scale 0.02, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.07, P = 0.41)). Two studies reported increased ease of positioning and less pain in non-face-down positioning groups on non-validated 0-to-10-point visual analogue scores. On an ease-of-positioning score running from 0 (very difficult) to 10 (very easy), there were consistent reports of the discomfort associated with face-down positioning: the median participant-reported ease-of-positioning score was 6 (IQR 4 to 8) in those undergoing 5 days of face-down positioning versus 9 (IQR 7 to 10) in the comparator group (P = 0.01). On a pain score with 0 being pain-free and 10 being in severe pain, mean pain score was 6.52 ± 2.48 in the face-down positioning group versus 2.53 ± 2.6 in the non-face-down positioning group. The adverse event of postoperative nerve compression occurred in less than 1 in every 100 (3 per 1000) participants advised to position face-down, and 0 in every 100 participants not advised to position face-down (699 participants, 8 studies, moderate-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We identified eight RCTs evaluating face-down positioning following surgery for macular hole. The included studies were not all directly comparable due to differences in the surgical techniques used and the durations of postoperative positioning advised. Low-certainty evidence suggests that face-down positioning may have little or no effect on macular hole closure after surgery. Face-down positioning is a low-risk intervention, with serious adverse events affecting fewer than 1 in 300 people. We suggest that any future trials focus on patients with larger macular holes, with interventions and outcome measures used in previous trials (i.e. with inner limiting membrane peeling, positioning durations of three to five days, and validated quality of life metrics) to allow future meta-analyses to determine any effect with greater precision and confidence.
Topics: Humans; Cataract Extraction; Diabetic Retinopathy; Pain; Retinal Perforations
PubMed: 37987517
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008228.pub3 -
Heliyon Aug 2023Mpox virus infection is a significant public health concern worldwide due to its potential severity and the likelihood of outbreaks occurring across different regions.... (Review)
Review
Mpox virus infection is a significant public health concern worldwide due to its potential severity and the likelihood of outbreaks occurring across different regions. Ophthalmic manifestations of the disease have been linked with more severe cases, leading to the need for hospitalization and antiviral therapy. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines to summarize the literature available on this topic. The review revealed that ophthalmic manifestations, such as conjunctivitis and periocular umbilicated lesions, are the most common in Mpox virus infections. However, severe manifestations, such as corneal opacity, that can potentially cause blindness may also occur. Antiviral treatment with tecovirimat and topical management for conjunctivitis can be considered for severe cases. However, the evidence quality is poor due to the predominance of case reports and imprecise characterization of the ophthalmic manifestations. Overall, ophthalmologists and healthcare professionals should be aware of these manifestations for early diagnosis and timely treatment.
PubMed: 37576249
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18561 -
Ocular Immunology and Inflammation Feb 2024To assess fetal and neonatal eyes abnormalities and their progression during the last ZIKV outbreak and summarize learned lessons. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To assess fetal and neonatal eyes abnormalities and their progression during the last ZIKV outbreak and summarize learned lessons.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted by a team of obstetricians and ophthalmologists.
RESULTS
Studies reporting ocular abnormalities during the prenatal ( = 5) and postnatal ( = 24) periods were included in the analysis. In the prenatal period, the most common ocular findings were intraocular calcification cases (4/6, 66.6%) and microphthalmia (3/6, 50%). Postnatal ocular abnormalities of congenital ZIKV infection were described after birth in 479 cases. Among them microphthalmia was reported in 13 cases (13/479, 2.7%). Posterior segment (retina and optic nerve) was the most affected structure, consisting of pigmentary changes (229/479, 47.8%), macular chorioretinal atrophy (216/479, 45%), optic nerve atrophy (181/479, 37.8%), increased cup-to-disk ratio (190/479, 39.6.%), optic nerve hypoplasia (93/479,19.4%), vascular changes (26/479, 5.4%), and retinal coloboma (20/479, 4.1%). The anterior segment was involved in 4.6% (22/479) of cases, including cataract (9/479, 1.8%), lens subluxation (1/479, 0.2%), iris coloboma (5/479, 1%), and congenital glaucoma (7/479, 1.4%). These ocular anomalies were isolated in one case (1/479, 0.2%) and multiple anomalies were found in the other cases. Long-term visual disorders have been described, with no possible improvement and even a worsening of some of the ocular anomalies previously observed. No reactivation of ocular lesions was observed.
CONCLUSION
This review highlights the severe ocular abnormalities associated with congenital ZIKV infections. The importance of multidisciplinary communication between the obstetrician, the maternal-fetal medicine specialist, and the ophthalmologist is emphasized.
PROTOCOL REGISTRATION
This systematic review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), registration440 188.
PubMed: 38350011
DOI: 10.1080/09273948.2024.2314086 -
Eye (London, England) Jul 2023Cerebral Visual Impairment (CVI) is a common condition in the UK. Patients with conditions associated with CVI are frequently seen in paediatric ophthalmology clinics... (Review)
Review
Cerebral Visual Impairment (CVI) is a common condition in the UK. Patients with conditions associated with CVI are frequently seen in paediatric ophthalmology clinics offering eye care professionals an opportunity to identify children proactively. In most cases CVI occurs as part of a neurodevelopmental condition or as a feature of multiple and complex disabilities. However, CVI can also be seen in children with apparently typical development. In some cases, high contrast visual acuity is normal and in other cases severely impaired. As such, identification of CVI requires evaluation of aspects of visual performance beyond high contrast acuity and consideration that visual function of those with CVI may fluctuate. Few paediatric ophthalmologists have received formal training in CVI. The detection and diagnosis of CVI varies across the UK and patients report hugely different experiences. A diagnosis of CVI is made based on professional clinical judgement and it is recognised that individual perspectives and local practice in the specific methodologies of assessment will vary. A systematic review and survey of professionals is underway to attempt to reach agreement on diagnostic criteria. Nonetheless, established pathways and published protocols can offer guidance on how a paediatric ophthalmology service can approach assessment of the child with suspected CVI. The purpose of this paper is to present a summary of research and clinical practice methods for detecting and diagnosing CVI in a paediatric ophthalmology outpatient setting. It represents current understanding of the topic and acknowledges the evolving nature of both practice and the evidence-base. A rapid literature review was undertaken to identify articles relating to clinical investigation of children with CVI. A focus group of QTVI and subject matter experts from sight loss charities was undertaken to address areas which were not covered by the literature review.
Topics: Child; Humans; Consensus; Vision Disorders; Visual Acuity; Ophthalmology; Blindness
PubMed: 36258009
DOI: 10.1038/s41433-022-02261-6 -
Indian Journal of Ophthalmology Nov 2022Cataract extraction is one of the most common surgical procedures performed worldwide. Manual small-incision cataract surgery (MSICS) is a popular technique of cataract... (Review)
Review
Cataract extraction is one of the most common surgical procedures performed worldwide. Manual small-incision cataract surgery (MSICS) is a popular technique of cataract extraction. Full economic evaluation of different techniques is of value to policy makers. This was a systematic review of published literature to present a brief overview of evidence available in respect of economic evaluation measures like cost effectiveness, cost utility, and cost parameters in cataract patients regarding MSICS. The data on these was sparse and heterogeneous. Direct costs of MSICS were lower than phacoemulsification (PE): $25.55 (PE) to $17.03 (MSICS) in India, $15 (MSICS) to $70 (PE) in Nepal, and $62.25 (MSICS) to $104.15 (PE) in Thailand. The cost utility analysis for MSICS demonstrated savings of $79.57 (INR6175) per gain in LogMAR BCVA, $8.91 (INR691) per QALY gained and $1.42 (INR110) per VF 14 score increment in India. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) $368.20 (13,215.50 Baht) for MSICS was better than $489.30 (17,561.70 Baht) for PE in Thailand. ICER for femto laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) compared to was €10,703 in femtosecond laser-assisted versus phacoemulsification cataract surgery (FEMCAT) study. The corrected ICER for PE against MSICS is €146.50. The limited data available demonstrates that MSICS is the most cost-effective technique among FLACS, PE, and MSICS. MSICS scores over other existing alternatives of cataract extraction from cost-effectiveness and cost-minimization approaches. Further research is required in this area.
Topics: Humans; Cataract Extraction; Phacoemulsification; Cataract; Lens Implantation, Intraocular; Ophthalmology
PubMed: 36308093
DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1266_22 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2022As demonstrated in pivotal clinical trials, brolucizumab can be used to treat neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) because it antagonizes vascular...
As demonstrated in pivotal clinical trials, brolucizumab can be used to treat neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) because it antagonizes vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in the vitreous. However, brolucizumab may cause retinal vasculitis obliterans in the presence of inflammation in the eyes. In the present study, a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of brolucizumab. ClinicTrail.gov., Embase, Cochrane Library, and PubMed were retrieved from inception until 31 December 2021 for RCTs assessing the efficacy and safety of brolucizumab. Changes in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central sub-field thickness (CSFT) and incidence of adverse events, serious adverse events, and serious ocular adverse events were extracted from eligible RCTs. A meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.1. A total of six RCTs with 3,574 participants were finally involved in this meta-analysis. The changes of best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) showed no statistically significant difference between the brolucizumab-treated group and aflibercept-treated group. Brolucizumab induced higher central sub-field thickness (CSFT) reduction than the control agent (aflibercept). The incidence of adverse events was similar between the brolucizumab group and control group (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.08, = 0.09), and brolucizumab caused fewer serious adverse events (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.95, = 0.01). However, brolucizumab could lead to more serious ocular adverse events than Lucentis and aflibercept (OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.11 to 4.16, = 0.02). Brolucizumab was non-inferior to other anti-VEGF agents in improving BCVA and decreasing CSFT. But it caused more serious ocular adverse events which is worthy of special attention by ophthalmologists.
PubMed: 35645802
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.890732 -
Germs Dec 2023is a rare pathogen in human infections, despite being widely distributed in natural environments. This systematic review aims to evaluate the evidence related to... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
is a rare pathogen in human infections, despite being widely distributed in natural environments. This systematic review aims to evaluate the evidence related to endophthalmitis caused by .
METHODS
A thorough search of PubMed, PubMed Central, and Scopus databases was conducted, covering the period up to October 2022.
RESULTS
A total of 53 records were identified, with 8 studies reporting a total of 21 cases meeting the inclusion criteria. Among these studies, 7 described isolated case reports, while 1 study described 14 cases. The overall quality of the reports was good, as all articles were determined to have low risk of bias. Vancomycin susceptibility was reported in only one case of isolated case reports, while the remaining cases were all vancomycin resistant. With regard to management, in most cases intravenous ampicillin and linezolid were administered, while only one study reported administration of vancomycin.
CONCLUSIONS
Ophthalmologists should be aware of the potential for to cause endophthalmitis infections and the challenges associated with its intrinsic resistance to vancomycin.
PubMed: 38361537
DOI: 10.18683/germs.2023.1404 -
Psychological Reports Oct 2021To investigate the prevalence of occupational burnout among ophthalmologists in order to better understand the mental and physical well-being of eye physicians and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the prevalence of occupational burnout among ophthalmologists in order to better understand the mental and physical well-being of eye physicians and surgeons in the professional workplace.
STUDY DESIGN
A systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
Online computer databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses were searched systematically and thoroughly. Conferences held through Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, American Academy of Ophthalmology, and Canadian Society of Ophthalmology were searched. Studies were screened using Covidence software. Data on reported burnout prevalence was extracted. STATA 15.0 was used to conduct meta-analysis. Our search strategy identified 318 records from online databases and 11 records from grey literature search, which were screened at 2-levels. Title and abstracts of each record were screened resulting in 24 records moving to full-text screening. Total of 9 records were utilized for quantitative analysis in the data extraction stage. Our results indicated significant professional burnout among ophthalmologists (ES = 0.41; CI: [0.26, 0.56]) with significant emotional exhaustion (ES = 0.43; CI: [0.33, 0.53]), depersonalization (ES = 0.29; CI: [0.13, 0.46]), and a low sense of personal accomplishment (ES = 0.36; CI: [0.08, 0.63]).
CONCLUSIONS
Significant occupational burnout among ophthalmologists is concerning because burnout can have a negative effect on the physical and mental health of eye physicians and surgeons. It could impact productivity, cutbacks in work hours, or lead to early retirement from the profession. Contributing factors in ophthalmologist burnout including work overload need to be addressed in a timely manner.
Topics: Burnout, Professional; Burnout, Psychological; Canada; Humans; Ophthalmologists; Prevalence
PubMed: 32865483
DOI: 10.1177/0033294120954135 -
Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Dec 2023A large number of studies have evaluated the efficacy of low-dose atropine in preventing or slowing myopic progression. However, it is challenging to evaluate the ocular... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
A large number of studies have evaluated the efficacy of low-dose atropine in preventing or slowing myopic progression. However, it is challenging to evaluate the ocular safety from these studies. We aimed to evaluate the incidence of adverse events induced by atropine in children with myopia. We performed a systematic literature search in several databases for studies published until November 2022. The incidence of adverse events induced by atropine was pooled by a common-effect (fixed-effect) or random-effects model. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to drug doses, types of adverse events, and ethnicity. A total of 31 articles were ultimately included in the study. The overall incidence of adverse events for atropine was 5.9%, and the incidence of severe adverse events was 0.0%. The most commonly reported adverse events were photophobia (9.1%) and blurred near vision (2.9%). Other adverse events including eye irritation/discomfort, allergic reactions, headache, stye/chalazion, glare, and dizziness occurred in less than 1% of the patients. The incidence of atropine-induced adverse events varied depending on the drug doses. A lower dose of atropine was associated with a lower incidence of adverse events. There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events for low-dose atropine between Asian and White children. Our study suggests photophobia and blurred near vision are the most frequently reported adverse events induced by atropine. Low-dose atropine is safer than moderate- and high-dose atropine. Our study could provide a safe reference for ophthalmologists to prescribe atropine for myopic children.
Topics: Humans; Child; Atropine; Mydriatics; Photophobia; Incidence; Disease Progression; Myopia; Ophthalmic Solutions
PubMed: 37492894
DOI: 10.1002/jcph.2320 -
Vaccines Jan 2023Vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have played an important global role in reducing morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 infection. While the benefits... (Review)
Review
Vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have played an important global role in reducing morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 infection. While the benefits of vaccination greatly outweigh the risks, adverse events do occur. Non-ocular adverse effects of the vaccines have been well-documented, but descriptions of ophthalmic effects remain limited. This systematic review aims to provide an overview of reported cases of corneal adverse events after receiving vaccination against COVID-19 and to compile existing clinical data to bring attention to these phenomena. Our review discusses corneal graft rejection, including proposed mechanisms, herpetic keratitis, and other reported corneal complications. Ophthalmologists and primary care physicians should be aware of such possible associations.
PubMed: 36680010
DOI: 10.3390/vaccines11010166