-
Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology Aug 2023Vernal keratoconjunctivitis (VKC) is a chronic, bilateral corneal and conjunctival problem which typically presents in young individuals. VKC is characterized by... (Review)
Review
Vernal keratoconjunctivitis (VKC) is a chronic, bilateral corneal and conjunctival problem which typically presents in young individuals. VKC is characterized by itching, photophobia, white mucous discharge, lacrimation, foreign body sensation, and pain due to corneal involvement of shield ulcers. Vernal keratoconjunctivitis is categorized within ocular diseases. The diagnosis is clinical, as no sure biomarkers pathognomonic of the disease have yet been identified. The VKC therapy relies on different types of drugs, from antihistamines and topical steroids to cyclosporine or tacrolimus eye drops. In extremely rare cases, there is also the need for surgical treatment for the debridement of ulcers, as well as for advanced glaucoma and cataracts, caused by excessive prolonged use of steroid eye drops. We performed a systematic review of the literature, according to PRISMA guideline recommendations. We searched the PubMed database from January 2016 to June 2023. Search terms were Vernal, Vernal keratoconjunctivitis, and VKC. We initially identified 211 articles. After the screening process, 168 studies were eligible according to our criteria and were included in the review. In this study, we performed a systematic literature review to provide a comprehensive overview of currently available diagnostic methods, management of VKC, and its treatments.
Topics: Humans; Conjunctivitis, Allergic; Ulcer; Cyclosporine; Tacrolimus; Ophthalmic Solutions
PubMed: 37658939
DOI: 10.1007/s12016-023-08970-4 -
The Journal of Headache and Pain Sep 2023Intranasal agents may be ideal for the treatment of migraine patients. Many new acute intranasal-specific therapies have been developed, but few of them have been... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Intranasal agents may be ideal for the treatment of migraine patients. Many new acute intranasal-specific therapies have been developed, but few of them have been directly compared. The aim of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare the efficacy and safety of various intranasal agents for the treatment of acute migraine in adult patients.
METHODS
The Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and PubMed were searched from inception to 15 August 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using intranasal agents (no restrictions on dose, formulation, dosing regimen or timing of the first dose) to treat adult patients with acute migraine were included. The primary efficacy endpoint was pain freedom at 2 h, and the primary safety endpoint was adverse events (AEs). The analysis process followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
RESULTS
Nineteen studies (21 RCTs, 9738 participants) were included. Compared to the placebo, 5 mg of zolmitriptan using a conventional liquid nasal spray device was the most effective for pain freedom at 2 h [odds ratio (OR): 4.67, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.43 to 6.43] and 24 h (OR: 5.49, 95% CI: 3.58 to 8.42) among all the interventions. Butorphanol nasal spray 1 mg was the most effective (OR: 8.62, 95% CI: 1.11 to 66.92) for pain freedom at 1 h, but with low-quality evidence. DFN-02 presented the highest freedom from nausea (OR: 4.95, 95% CI: 1.29 to 19.01) and phonophobia (OR: 5.36, 95% CI: 1.67 to 17.22) at 2 h, albeit with lower odds of achieving complete pain freedom. ROX-828 showed the highest improvement in freedom from photophobia at 2 h (OR: 4.03, 95% CI: 1.66 to 9.81). Dihydroergotamine nasal spray was significantly associated with the highest risk of AEs (OR: 9.65, 95% CI: 4.39 to 21.22) and was not recommended for routine use. Zavegepant nasal spray demonstrated the lowest risk of AEs (OR: 2.04, 95% CI: 1.37 to 3.03). The results of sensitivity analyses for the primary endpoints (pain freedom at 2 h and AEs) were generally consistent with those of the base case model.
CONCLUSIONS
Compared with other new intranasal-specific therapies in treating migraine attacks, zolmitriptan nasal spray 5 mg was the most effective agent for pain freedom at 2 h. Zavegepant nasal spray 10 mg had the fewest adverse side effects.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Nasal Sprays; Network Meta-Analysis; Migraine Disorders; Oxazolidinones
PubMed: 37723470
DOI: 10.1186/s10194-023-01662-6 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023To comprehensively reassess the efficacy and safety of different concentrations of atropine for retarding myopia progression and seek the most appropriate therapeutic...
To comprehensively reassess the efficacy and safety of different concentrations of atropine for retarding myopia progression and seek the most appropriate therapeutic concentration for clinical practice. We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Chinese Science and Technology Periodicals (VIP) and China National Knowledege Infrastructure (CNKI) from their inception to 23 March 2023, to obtain eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that had atropine in at least one treatment arm and placebo/no intervention in another arm. We evaluated the risk of bias of the RCTs according to the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration for RCTs and quality of cohort studies by the Newcastle‒Ottawa Scale. Weighted mean difference (WMD), 95% confidence interval were calculated for meta-analysis. All data analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.3, STATA 12.0 and SPSS 26.0 software. A total of 44 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Weighted mean difference (WMD) were 0.73 diopters (D), 0.65 D, 0.35 D per year in refraction progression ( = 14.63, = 86.3%; < 0.001) and -0.26 mm, -0.37 mm, -0.11 mm per year in axial length progression ( = 5.80, = 65.5%; = 0.06) for high (0.5%-1%), moderate (0.1%-0.25%), and low (0.005%-0.05%) dose atropine groups, respectively. Logarithmic dose‒response correlations were found between atropine and their effect on change of refraction, axial length, accommodation and photopic pupil diameter. Through these curves, we found that atropine with concentrations ≤0.05% atropine resulted in a residual value of accommodation of more than 5 D and an increase in pupil diameter no more than 3 mm. Higher doses of atropine resulted in a higher incidence of adverse effects, of which the incidence of photophobia was dose-dependent ( = 0.477, = 0.029). Both the efficacy and risk of adverse events for atropine treatment of myopia were mostly dose dependent. Comprehensively considered the myopia control effect and safety of each dose, 0.05% may be the best concentration of atropine to control myopia progression at present, at which myopia is better controlled and the side effects are tolerable. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, CRD42022377705.
PubMed: 37767401
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1227787 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2020Traumatic eye complaints account for 3% of all hospital emergency department visits. The most common traumatic injury to the eye is blunt trauma, which accounts for 30%... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Traumatic eye complaints account for 3% of all hospital emergency department visits. The most common traumatic injury to the eye is blunt trauma, which accounts for 30% of these visits. Blunt trauma frequently leads to traumatic iridocyclitis, thus causing anterior uveitis. Iridocyclitis frequently causes tearing, photophobia, eye pain, and vision loss. These symptoms are a result of the inflammatory processes and ciliary spasms to iris muscles and sphincter. The inflammatory process is usually managed with topical corticosteroids, while the ciliary spasm is blunted by dilating the pupils with topical mydriatic agents, an adjuvant therapy. However, the effectiveness of mydriatic agents has not been quantified in terms of reduction of ocular pain and visual acuity loss.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of topical mydriatics as adjunctive therapy to topical corticosteroids for traumatic iridocyclitis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register (2019, issue 6); Ovid MEDLINE; Embase.com; Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) Plus; PubMed; ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic search for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 12 June 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We planned to include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared topical mydriatic agents in conjunction with topical corticosteroid therapy versus topical corticosteroids alone, in participants with traumatic iridocyclitis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors (JH, MK) independently screened titles and abstracts, then full-text reports, against eligibility criteria. We planned to have two authors independently extract data from included studies. We resolved differences in opinion by discussion.
MAIN RESULTS
There were no eligible RCTs that compared the interventions of interest in people with traumatic iridocyclitis.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We did not find any evidence from RCTs about the efficacy of topical mydriatic agents as an adjunctive therapy with topical corticosteroids for treating traumatic iridocyclitis. In the absence of these types of studies, we cannot draw any firm conclusions. Controlled trials that compare the combined use of topical mydriatic agents and corticosteroid drops against standard corticosteroid drops alone, in people with traumatic iridocyclitis are required. These may provide evidence about the efficacy and risk of topical mydriatic drops as adjuvant therapy for traumatic iridocyclitis.
PubMed: 35659470
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013260.pub2 -
Medical Hypothesis, Discovery &... 2022The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been the most challenging health problem in the last 2 years. Post-COVID-19 multisystem inflammatory syndrome of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been the most challenging health problem in the last 2 years. Post-COVID-19 multisystem inflammatory syndrome of children (MIS-C) is a severe post-COVID-19 complication in pediatric patients. Ocular manifestations may be the first presentation of MIS-C, wherein prompt treatment may improve outcomes. In this systematic review, we aimed to summarize the acute and sub-acute ocular manifestations in pediatric patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19.
METHODS
We included all online primary studies, with no language restriction and published between January 1, 2019 and November 18, 2020, reporting any acute or sub-acute ocular manifestations in children with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. PubMed/MEDLINE was searched using the following MeSH and Emtree terms: "eye," "ophthalmologic," "ocular," "vision," "conjunctivitis," "severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2," "SARS-CoV-2," "corona," "2019-nCoV," "COVID19," and "COVID." The eligibility and quality of the selected records were assessed by two independent reviewers as per the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review.
RESULTS
A total of 1,192 records were identified electronically. Seven papers were extracted from the reference lists of the eligible records. Thirty-six papers met the inclusion criteria and were categorized into two subgroups according to acute or sub-acute presentation of ocular manifestations. Among 463 pediatric patients with COVID-19, 72 (15.5%) had acute ocular manifestations. There was one patient with central retinal vein occlusion and another with photophobia and diplopia associated with meningoencephalitis. Among 895 pediatric patients with post-COVID-19 MIS-C, 469 (52.4%) had ocular manifestations, which only included non-purulent conjunctivitis.
CONCLUSIONS
Ocular manifestations have been reported in less than one-fifth of pediatric patients with acute COVID-19. Furthermore, conjunctivitis was the only ocular manifestation reported in half of the patients with MIS-C, and it may be missed easily due to its non-purulent nature. During the COVID-19 pandemic, pediatricians and health workers must remain vigilant for early detection of signs of this potentially fatal post-COVID-19 inflammatory syndrome.
PubMed: 37641695
DOI: 10.51329/mehdiophthal1440 -
Dystonia (Lausanne, Switzerland) 2022Blepharospasm is a type of dystonia where the diagnosis is often delayed because its varied clinical manifestations are not well recognized. The purpose of this study...
OBJECTIVE
Blepharospasm is a type of dystonia where the diagnosis is often delayed because its varied clinical manifestations are not well recognized. The purpose of this study was to provide a comprehensive picture of its clinical features including presenting features, motor features, and non-motor features.
METHODS
This was a two-part study. The first part involved a systematic literature review that summarized clinical features for 10,324 cases taken from 41 prior reports. The second part involved a summary of clinical features for 884 cases enrolled in a large multicenter cohort collected by the Dystonia Coalition investigators, along with an analysis of the factors that contribute to the spread of dystonia beyond the periocular region.
RESULTS
For cases in the literature and the Dystonia Coalition, blepharospasm emerged in the 50s and was more frequent in women. Many presented with non-specific motor symptoms such as increased blinking (51.9%) or non-motor sensory features such as eye soreness or pain (38.7%), photophobia (35.5%), or dry eyes (10.7%). Non-motor psychiatric features were also common including anxiety disorders (34-40%) and depression (21-24%). Among cases presenting with blepharospasm in the Dystonia Coalition cohort, 61% experienced spread of dystonia to other regions, most commonly the oromandibular region and neck. Features associated with spread included severity of blepharospasm, family history of dystonia, depression, and anxiety.
CONCLUSIONS
This study provides a comprehensive summary of motor and non-motor features of blepharospasm, along with novel insights into factors that may be responsible for its poor diagnostic recognition and natural history.
PubMed: 36248010
DOI: 10.3389/dyst.2022.10359 -
The Journal of Headache and Pain Feb 2024To compare the outcomes associated with the use of lasmiditan, rimegepant, ubrogepant, and zavegepant for the acute management of migraine headaches. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Comparison of effectiveness and safety of lasmiditan and CGRP-antagonists for the acute treatment of migraine in adults: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised trials.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the outcomes associated with the use of lasmiditan, rimegepant, ubrogepant, and zavegepant for the acute management of migraine headaches.
METHODS
We searched four electronic databases from database inception to August 31, 2023, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that report efficacy and safety for the acute treatment of migraine. The risk of bias in the included RCTs was evaluated according to the Cochrane tool, and the certainty of evidence using the CINeMA approach. We conducted frequentist network meta-analyses (NMA) to summarise the evidence. Data were analyzed using R-4.3.1.
RESULTS
A total of 18 eligible studies including 10 different types of interventions with 22,429 migraine patients were included. NMA results showed that compared to ubrogepant (25 mg and 50 mg) and zavegepant, lasmiditan (100 mg and 200 mg) exhibits an elevated probability of achieving pain relief within a 2-hour interval. Similarly, relative to zavegepant, rimegepant (75 mg) and ubrogepant (50 mg and 100 mg) demonstrate an enhanced likelihood of sustaining pain relief over a 24-hour period. Furthermore, in contrast to ubrogepant (25 mg) and lasmiditan (50 mg), rimegepant (75 mg) presents a heightened probability of achieving freedom from photophobia within 2 h. Regarding safety, lasmiditan carries the highest risk of adverse events, which are associated with an increased incidence of adverse effects, including dizziness, somnolence, asthenia, paresthesia, and fatigue.
CONCLUSIONS
In this NMA, a spectrum of evidence ranging from very low to high levels underscores the favorable efficacy and tolerability of rimegepant 75 mg and ubrogepant 100 mg, positioning them as potential candidates for the acute management of migraine. Concurrently, lasmiditan (100 mg and 200 mg) exhibits notable efficacy, albeit accompanied by an increased susceptibility to adverse events. These findings should still be approached with caution, primarily due to the intrinsic limitations associated with indirect comparisons.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Benzamides; Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide; Migraine Disorders; Network Meta-Analysis; Pain; Piperidines; Pyridines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38311738
DOI: 10.1186/s10194-024-01723-4 -
The Journal of Headache and Pain Mar 2022Vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are used to reduce the risk of developing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Despite the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are used to reduce the risk of developing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Despite the significant benefits in terms of reduced risk of hospitalization and death, different adverse events may present after vaccination: among them, headache is one of the most common, but nowadays there is no summary presentation of its incidence and no description of its main features.
METHODS
We searched PubMed and EMBASE covering the period between January 1 2020 and August 6, 2021, looking for record in English and with an abstract and using three main search terms (with specific variations): COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2; Vaccination; headache/adverse events. We selected manuscript including information on subjects developing headache after injection, and such information had to be derived from a structured form (i.e. no free reporting). Pooled estimates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Analyses were carried out by vaccine vs. placebo, by first vs. second dose, and by mRNA-based vs. "traditional" vaccines; finally, we addressed the impact of age and gender on post-vaccine headache onset.
RESULTS
Out of 9338 records, 84 papers were included in the review, accounting for 1.57 million participants, 94% of whom received BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1. Headache was generally the third most common AE: it was detected in 22% (95% CI 18-27%) of subjects after the first dose of vaccine and in 29% (95% CI 23-35%) after the second, with an extreme heterogeneity. Those receiving placebo reported headache in 10-12% of cases. No differences were detected across different vaccines or by mRNA-based vs. "traditional" ones. None of the studies reported information on headache features. A lower prevalence of headache after the first injection of BNT162b2 among older participants was shown.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results show that vaccines are associated to a two-fold risk of developing headache within 7 days from injection, and the lack of difference between vaccine types enable to hypothesize that headache is secondary to systemic immunological reaction than to a vaccine-type specific reaction. Some descriptions report onset within the first 24 h and that in around one-third of the cases, headache has migraine-like features with pulsating quality, phono and photophobia; in 40-60% of the cases aggravation with activity is observed. The majority of patients used some medication to treat headache, the one perceived as the most effective being acetylsalicylic acid.
Topics: BNT162 Vaccine; COVID-19; Headache; Humans; SARS-CoV-2; Vaccination
PubMed: 35361131
DOI: 10.1186/s10194-022-01400-4 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Mar 2024Early-onset myopia increases the risk of irreversible high myopia. This study systematically evaluated the efficacy and safety of low-dose atropine for myopia control... (Review)
Review
Early-onset myopia increases the risk of irreversible high myopia. This study systematically evaluated the efficacy and safety of low-dose atropine for myopia control in children with premyopia through meta-analysis using random-effects models. Effect sizes were calculated using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Comprehensive searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov were conducted until 20 December 2023, without language restrictions. Four studies involving 644 children with premyopia aged 4-12 years were identified, with atropine concentrations ranging from 0.01% to 0.05%. The analysis focused on myopia incidence and atropine-related adverse events. Lower myopia incidence (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.40-0.97 D/y; = 0.03) and reduction in rapid myopia shift (≥0.5 D/1y) (RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.26-0.96 D/y; < 0.01) were observed in the 12-24-month period. Spherical equivalent and axial length exhibited attenuated progression in the atropine group. No major adverse events were detected in either group, whereas the incidence of photophobia and allergic conjunctivitis did not vary in the 12-24-month period. Our meta-analysis supports atropine's efficacy and safety for delaying myopia incidence and controlling progression in children with premyopia. However, further investigation is warranted due to limited studies.
PubMed: 38592670
DOI: 10.3390/jcm13051506 -
Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology...The purpose of this study was to pool the prevalence rate of monkeypox-associated eye manifestations and/or complications during the current and previous outbreaks. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to pool the prevalence rate of monkeypox-associated eye manifestations and/or complications during the current and previous outbreaks.
DESIGN
A systematic review and meta-analysis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
On August 7, 2022, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant articles. We included all studies that reported the involvement of the eye (either as a manifestation or a complication) among patients with monkeypox. The primary outcome included pooling the effect size (ES) of reported manifestations and complications, and the secondary outcome included the conduct of a subgroup analysis based on the timing of the monkeypox outbreak (before vs. during 2022).
RESULTS
Eleven studies reporting 3179 monkeypox-confirmed cases were included. Eye manifestations included conjunctivitis, corneal, conjunctival, and eyelid lesions, photophobia, and eye pain. Compared with previous monkeypox outbreaks, the current outbreak revealed much lower rates of ocular involvement in terms of conjunctivitis (ES=1%; 95% CI: 0%-1% vs. ES=17%; 95% CI: 11%-22%), corneal and conjunctival lesions (ES=1%; 95% CI: 0%-2% vs. ES=13%; 95% CI: 4%-22%), and eyelid lesions (ES=1%; 95% CI: 0%-4% vs. ES=13%; 95% CI: 5%-28%). Monkeypox-associated eye complications were reported only in the previous outbreaks which included keratitis (ES=4%; 95% CI: 3%-6%), corneal ulceration (ES=4%; 95% CI: 2%-5%), unilateral (ES=3%; 95% CI: 1%-4%) and bilateral blindness (ES=0%; 95% CI: 0%-2%), and impaired vision (ES=4%; 95% CI: 1%-8%).
CONCLUSIONS
Ophthalmic manifestations and complications are common among monkeypox-confirmed cases. Although these data are mainly related to previous outbreaks, health care workers should familiarize themselves with these signs to provide better care for monkeypox patients.
Topics: Humans; Mpox (monkeypox); Conjunctiva; Disease Outbreaks; Conjunctivitis; Keratitis
PubMed: 37249903
DOI: 10.1097/APO.0000000000000608