-
Acta Ophthalmologica May 2019To explore the effectiveness and safety of vitrectomy for congenital cataract surgery. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To explore the effectiveness and safety of vitrectomy for congenital cataract surgery.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Science Direct, The Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and the Wanfang Database. Two researchers extracted data and assessed paper quality independently. Posterior capsule opacification (PCO) or visual axis opacification (VAO), reoperation rate, visual acuity, intraocular lenses (IOL) deposit, synechias, uveitis, secondary glaucoma, low-contrast sensitivity and IOL decentration were compared.
RESULTS
We included 11 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 634 congenital cataract eyes. Cases of posterior capsule opacification in vitrectomy group were significantly less than that of control group, with risk ratio (RR) of 0.15 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.09, 0.26], and there was no heterogeneity (I = 0%, p = 0.94). Reoperation rate in vitrectomy group was lower than that of control group either (RR = 0.40, 95%CI: 0.17, 0.94), and there was no heterogeneity (I = 0%, p = 0.85). Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) measured in LogMAR unit of vitrectomy group was smaller, with a mean difference (MD) of -0.17 (95%CI: -0.28, -0.05), and I was only 22%, indicating of a small heterogeneity. No statistical difference was found between two groups on IOL deposit (RR = 1.23, 95%CI: 0.70, 2.17), and the heterogeneity was small (I = 16%, p = 0.31). No statistical difference was found between two groups on synechias (RR = 1.08, 95%CI: 0.60, 1.94), with a quite small heterogeneity (I = 3%, p = 0.38). No statistical difference was found between two groups on uveitis (RR = 0.55, 95%CI: 0.15, 2.01), and there was no heterogeneity (I = 0%, p = 0.94). There was no statistical difference on IOP either, with a MD of 0.25 (95%CI: -1.56, 2.07), and there was no heterogeneity (I = 0%). Egger's test showed that there was no publication bias for all assessed outcomes. Low-contrast sensitivity was better in the vitrectomy group. And no evidence indicated vitrectomy could lead to a higher risk on secondary glaucoma or IOL decentration.
CONCLUSION
Vitrectomy helps lower the PCO risk and reoperation risk after congenital cataract surgery, and also, vitrectomy helps patients gain a better BCVA and achieve a better low-contrast sensitivity, with no trade-off on IOP control, IOL deposit, synechias, uveitis and secondary glaucoma. We recommend performing vitrectomy during congenital cataract surgery.
Topics: Cataract; Cataract Extraction; Humans; Lenses, Intraocular; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Visual Acuity; Vitrectomy
PubMed: 30565873
DOI: 10.1111/aos.13974 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2016Acute toxoplasma retinochoroiditis causes transient symptoms of ocular discomfort and may lead to permanent visual loss. Antibiotic treatment aims primarily to reduce... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute toxoplasma retinochoroiditis causes transient symptoms of ocular discomfort and may lead to permanent visual loss. Antibiotic treatment aims primarily to reduce the risk of permanent visual loss, recurrent retinochoroiditis, and the severity and duration of acute symptoms. There is uncertainty about the effectiveness of antibiotic treatment.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the effects of antibiotic treatment versus placebo or no treatment for toxoplasma retinochoroiditis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision group Trials Register) (2016, Issue 1), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to February 2016), EMBASE (January 1980 to February 2016), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (January 1982 to February 2016), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov), and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 22 February 2016. We searched the reference lists of identified articles and contacted pharmaceutical companies for unpublished trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials that compared any antibiotic treatment against placebo or no treatment. We excluded trials that included immunocompromised participants. We considered any antibiotic treatment known to be active against Toxoplasma gondii. Antibiotic treatment could be given in any dose orally, by intramuscular injection, by intravenous infusion, or by intravitreal injection.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The primary outcomes for this review were visual acuity at least three months after treatment and risk of recurrent retinochoroiditis. Secondary outcomes were improvement in symptoms and signs of intraocular inflammation, size of lesion, and adverse events. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
Four trials that randomised a total of 268 participants met the inclusion criteria. In all four studies antibiotic was administered orally.One study conducted in Brazil in both adults and children compared trimethoprim-sulfamexacocol over 20 months to no treatment and was judged to be at high risk of performance, detection, and attrition bias. The other three studies compared antibiotic treatment to placebo. We judged these three studies to be at a mixture of low or unclear risk of bias due to poor reporting. One study conducted in the US in adults studied pyrimethamine-trisulfapyrimidine for eight weeks; one study conducted in the UK in children and adults evaluated pyrimethamine for four weeks; and one study conducted in Brazil in adults investigated trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for 12 months. In the last study, all participants had active retinochoroiditis and were treated with antibiotics for 45 days prior to randomisation to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus placebo.Only the study in Brazil of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole over 12 months, in participants with healed lesions, reported the effect of treatment on visual acuity. People treated with antibiotics may have a similar change in visual acuity compared with people treated with placebo at one year (mean difference -1.00 letters, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.93 to 5.93 letters; 93 participants; low-quality evidence).Treatment with antibiotics probably reduces the risk of recurrent retinochoroiditis compared with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.26, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.63; 227 participants; 3 studies; I(2) = 0%; moderate-quality evidence); similar results were seen for acute and chronic retinochoroiditis.The UK study of pyrimethamine for four weeks reported an improvement in intraocular inflammation in treated compared with control participants (RR 1.76, 95% CI 0.98 to 3.19; 29 participants; low-quality evidence). The study in Brazil of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for 12 months stated that the severity of inflammation was higher in the comparator group when compared to the antibiotic-treated group but did not provide further details. In the US study of pyrimethamine-trisulfapyrimidine for eight weeks intraocular inflammation had almost completely resolved by eight weeks in all participants, however in this study all participants received steroid treatment.Two studies (UK and US studies) reported an increased risk of adverse events in treated participants. These were a fall in haemoglobin, leucocyte, and platelet count, nausea, loss of appetite, rash, and arthralgia.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Treatment with antibiotics probably reduces the risk of recurrent toxoplasma retinochoroiditis, but there is currently no good evidence that this leads to better visual outcomes. However, absence of evidence of effect is not the same as evidence of no effect. Further trials of people with acute and chronic toxoplasma retinochoroiditis affecting any part of the retina are required to determine the effects of antibiotic treatment on visual outcomes.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Child; Chorioretinitis; Drug Combinations; Humans; Pyrimethamine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recurrence; Secondary Prevention; Sulfadiazine; Sulfamerazine; Sulfamethazine; Toxoplasmosis, Ocular; Trimethoprim, Sulfamethoxazole Drug Combination; Visual Acuity; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 27198629
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002218.pub2 -
Survey of Ophthalmology 2021To identify clinical presentations, main causes, and prognosis of ophthalmic involvement in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), we performed a systematic review of... (Review)
Review
To identify clinical presentations, main causes, and prognosis of ophthalmic involvement in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), we performed a systematic review of articles describing CLL ophthalmic involvement in January 2019, using the PubMed database. We found 86 articles describing 123 cases of patients with ophthalmic involvement associated with CLL. Ophthalmic symptoms were CLL's first manifestation in 25.6% of patients and revealed Richter transformation in 11.0%. There were three main causes of ophthalmic features: CLL-infiltration (52.0%), lymphoma (26.0%), and infection (15.4%), with specific clinical and radiological characteristics. CLL-infiltration was mostly bilateral, whereas lymphoma was usually unilateral (P = 0.02). Optic neuropathy was always secondary to CLL-infiltration, and in those cases, cerebrospinal fluid immunophenotyping was a potential alternative to invasive biopsy as it confirmed the diagnosis in 4 patients (36.4%). On the contrary, lymphoma usually presented as adnexal involvement (P = 0.04), particularly as an orbital mass (P = 0.004). Infections concerned mostly patients previously treated for CLL (P < 0.0001), and main presentations included posterior uveitis (P = 0.0002) and retinal infiltrates (P < 0.0001). Overall, the prognosis was poor, as 29.3% of the patients died within 36 months of follow-up, and 26.1% had a partial or total visual loss. Eye infections were associated with the poorest prognosis as 47% of patients died, with a 6-month-median survival.
Topics: Biopsy; Humans; Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell; Lymphoma, Large B-Cell, Diffuse; Prognosis
PubMed: 32407752
DOI: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2020.05.001 -
Journal of Ophthalmology 2021Corticosteroids are used in a variety of ophthalmological diseases. One challenge faced by ophthalmologists is to deliver corticosteroids to the posterior segment of the... (Review)
Review
Corticosteroids are used in a variety of ophthalmological diseases. One challenge faced by ophthalmologists is to deliver corticosteroids to the posterior segment of the eye with efficacy and safety. Sustained-release corticosteroid implants may be the answer to this problem. The 0.19 mg fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implant (Iluvien®) releases FAc for 36 months, and it is approved for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) and noninfectious uveitis. We decided to do a systematic review to acknowledge in which other diseases FAc implant is being used off-label. A literature search was performed in the following three electronic databases: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (from January 1, 2000, to September 20, 2020), using the following query: ("Fluocinolone Acetonide" OR Iluvien®) AND ("eye" OR "ocular" OR "intravitreal)." A total of 11 papers were included, and the use of FAc implant was analyzed in the following diseases: radiation-induced maculopathy (RM); paraneoplastic visual syndromes (melanoma-associated retinopathy (MAR) and cancer-associated retinopathy (CAR)); Sjogren's syndrome-related keratopathy; retinal vein occlusion (RVO); cystoid macular edema (CME); diabetic retinal neurodegeneration (DRN); and retinitis pigmentosa (RP). FAc implant may be a potential treatment for these diseases; however, the level of scientific evidence of the included studies in this review is limited. Further studies with larger cohorts and longer follow-ups are needed to validate this data.
PubMed: 34055398
DOI: 10.1155/2021/6678364 -
Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases Oct 2019To discuss available information on the effectiveness of anti-toxoplasma therapy for ocular toxoplasmosis and to provide clinicians with a practical approach to the...
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
To discuss available information on the effectiveness of anti-toxoplasma therapy for ocular toxoplasmosis and to provide clinicians with a practical approach to the disease.
RECENT FINDINGS
Only eleven randomized studies were identified. In the three studies for acute retinitis, there was a clear trend in favor of treatment. In the two studies for the prevention of recurrences, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole prophylaxis was superior to placebo. In the six studies comparing different regimens, there was no statistically significant difference between the regimens. In the setting of acute posterior uveitis suspected to be caused by toxoplasma, serological testing should always be obtained, and anti-toxoplasma drug treatment, and corticosteroids should be instituted for at least 6 weeks. Toxoplasmic chorioretinitis during pregnancy represents a particular challenge.
SUMMARY
Treatment with at least two drugs and corticosteroids should be offered to patients with active toxoplasmic chorioretinitis. Pregnant women with confirmed acute infection and concomitant acute retinitis should be treated for the ocular lesion(s) and to prevent vertical transmission. Pregnant women with chronic Toxoplasma infection acquired prior to gestation and concomitant retinitis by reactivation should be treated for the retinitis and monitored for vertical transmission.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Antiprotozoal Agents; Diagnostic Tests, Routine; Disease Management; Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Pregnant Women; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Toxoplasmosis, Ocular; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31313714
DOI: 10.1097/QCO.0000000000000577 -
Survey of Ophthalmology 2013The use of intravitreal (IVT) corticosteroids for treatment of posterior segment diseases has increased significantly over the last decade. A commonly recognized... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The use of intravitreal (IVT) corticosteroids for treatment of posterior segment diseases has increased significantly over the last decade. A commonly recognized complication of IVT steroids is secondary ocular hypertension (OHT) that can occur immediately secondary to direct intraocular volume increase or weeks to months later as a result of increased outflow resistance. We performed a meta-analysis and found 32% (95% confidence interval, 28.2-36.3) of individuals developed OHT following 4 mg IVT triamcinolone, 66% (50.2-78.8) and 79% (72.2-84.5) following 0.59 and 2.1 mg fluocinolone implant, respectively, and 11% (6.4-17.9) and 15% (9.2-24.3) following 0.35 and 0.7 mg dexamethasone implant, respectively. Risk factors included pre-existing glaucoma, higher baseline intraocular pressure (IOP), younger age, OHT following previous injection, uveitis, higher steroid dosage, and fluocinolone implant. Most cases of OHT can be controlled medically; up to 45% following fluocinolone implant require surgery, however. We suggest a protocol to monitor IOP after IVT steroid injection/implantation that includes checking IOP within 30 minutes after injection, followed by 1 week after IVT triamcinolone and 2 weeks after implant insertion, then every 2 weeks for the first month and monthly for up to 6 months after IVT triamcinolone and dexamethasone implantation and 9 months after fluocinolone implantation.
Topics: Dexamethasone; Drug Implants; Fluocinolone Acetonide; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Intraocular Pressure; Intravitreal Injections; Monitoring, Physiologic; Ocular Hypertension; Risk Factors; Tonometry, Ocular; Triamcinolone Acetonide
PubMed: 23768920
DOI: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2012.08.003 -
Medicina Clinica Sep 2020To generate recommendations on the use of immunomodulators in patients with non-infectious, non-neoplastic intermediate uveitis (IU), posterior uveitis (PU) and...
OBJECTIVE
To generate recommendations on the use of immunomodulators in patients with non-infectious, non-neoplastic intermediate uveitis (IU), posterior uveitis (PU) and panuveitis (PanU) based on best evidence and experience.
METHODS
A multidisciplinary panel of 5 experts was established, who defined the scope, users, and sections of the document. A systematic literature review (SLR) was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of immunomodulatory drugs in patients with non-infectious, non-neoplastic, non-anterior uveitis. The results of the SLR were presented and discussed during an expert meeting in which 34 recommendations were generated. The level of agreement with the recommendations was also tested in 25 additional experts following a Delphi process. Recommendations were voted from 1 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). We defined agreement if at least 70% of the experts voted ≥7. The level of evidence and grade or recommendation were assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence.
RESULTS
The SLR included 33 articles. The 34 recommendations were accepted after 2 Delphi rounds (3 of them were modified after the first round). They include specific recommendations on patients with non-infectious, non-neoplastic, PU and PanU, as well as different treatment guidelines.
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with non-infectious, non-neoplastic, non-anterior uveitis these recommendations might help treatment decision making, due to the lack of robust evidence or other globally accepted algorithms.
Topics: Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Panuveitis; Uveitis; Uveitis, Anterior
PubMed: 32199631
DOI: 10.1016/j.medcli.2019.10.023 -
Ophthalmology May 2003To determine the effectiveness of systemic antibiotic treatment for toxoplasmic retinochoroiditis. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To determine the effectiveness of systemic antibiotic treatment for toxoplasmic retinochoroiditis.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Toxoplasma retinochoroiditis is a significant cause of visual morbidity. Multiple different antibiotic regimens are used, but controversy about treatment effectiveness remains.
LITERATURE REVIEWED
Searches were conducted of Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline (1966 onward), Embase (1980 onward), Dissertation Abstracts (1861 onward), Lilacs (1982 onward), and Pascal (1984 onward). Pharmaceutical companies were contacted for unpublished data. Any randomized controlled trials that compared antibiotics versus placebo in immunocompetent patients with toxoplasmic retinochoroiditis were retrieved. Primary outcome measures were long-term visual acuity and risk of recurrent retinochoroiditis. Secondary outcomes included duration and severity of acute symptoms, size of the lesion at end of follow-up, and adverse effects of treatment.
RESULTS
Only 3 studies (total of 173 participants) were randomized controlled trials and hence met the inclusion criteria (level II). All 3 were methodologically poor, and 2 were carried out more than 35 years ago. None reported the effect on long-term visual outcome. We found no evidence for a beneficial effect on the duration and severity of signs of acute toxoplasmic retinochoroiditis (A,II). There was weak evidence for an effect of long-term treatment for chronic recurrent toxoplasmic retinochoroiditis on lesion recurrence. Treatment was associated with adverse effects.
CONCLUSIONS
There is a lack of evidence to support routine antibiotic treatment for acute toxoplasmic retinochoroiditis. Placebo-controlled randomized trials of antibiotic treatment in patients presenting with acute or chronic toxoplasmic retinochoroiditis arising in any part of the retina are required.
Topics: Acute Disease; Animals; Antiprotozoal Agents; Chorioretinitis; Databases, Factual; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recurrence; Toxoplasma; Toxoplasmosis, Ocular; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 12750091
DOI: 10.1016/S0161-6420(03)00083-6 -
Ocular Immunology and Inflammation Apr 2023To compare the outcomes of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) versus methotrexate (MTX) in non-infectious ocular inflammatory disease (NIOID). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To compare the outcomes of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) versus methotrexate (MTX) in non-infectious ocular inflammatory disease (NIOID).
METHODS
The study was performed as per the PRISMA Guidelines. A search identified all studies comparing MMF versus MTX in NIOID. Treatment result and side effects were primary outcomes.
RESULTS
Four studies enrolling 905 patients were identified. There was no significant difference between MMF and MTX groups in overall treatment success (OR = 0.97, P = .96), treatment failure (OR = 0.86, P = .85). MTX showed a significantly improved effect in cases involving posterior uveitis and panuveitis (OR = 0.41, P = .003). In addition, MTX was associated with a faster median time to treatment success and had less side effects when compared to MTX, however this was not significant. For secondary outcomes, no significant difference was found in visual acuity and resolution of macular oedema.
CONCLUSION
MMF is comparable to MTX in the treatment of NIOID.
Topics: Humans; Methotrexate; Immunosuppressive Agents; Inflammation; Mycophenolic Acid; Enzyme Inhibitors; Treatment Outcome; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 35201968
DOI: 10.1080/09273948.2022.2034166 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2014Cataract formation often occurs in people with uveitis. It is unclear which intraocular lens (IOL) type is optimal for use in cataract surgery for eyes with uveitis. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Cataract formation often occurs in people with uveitis. It is unclear which intraocular lens (IOL) type is optimal for use in cataract surgery for eyes with uveitis.
OBJECTIVES
To summarize the effects of different IOLs on visual acuity, other visual outcomes, and quality of life in people with uveitis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 7), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to August 2013), EMBASE (January 1980 to August 2013), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) (January 1982 to August 2013), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 14 August 2013. We also performed forward and backward searching using the Science Citation Index and the reference lists of the included studies, respectively, in August 2013.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing hydrophobic or hydrophilic acrylic, silicone, or poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) IOLs with or without heparin-surface modification (HSM), with each other, or with no treatment in adults with uveitis, for any indication, undergoing cataract surgery.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. Two review authors screened the search results and for included studies, assessed the risk of bias and extracted data independently. We contacted study investigators for additional information. We did not perform a meta-analysis due to variability in reporting and follow-up intervals for the primary and secondary outcomes of interest.
MAIN RESULTS
We included four RCTs involving 216 participants (range of 2 to 140 participants with uveitic cataract per trial) and comparing up to four types of IOLs. The largest study was an international study with centers in Brazil, Egypt, Finland, France, Japan, the Netherlands, Slovak Republic, Spain, and the USA; two studies were conducted in Germany and one in Saudi Arabia. There was substantial heterogeneity with respect to the ages of participants and etiologies of uveitis within and across studies. The length of follow-up among the studies ranged from 1 to 24 months after cataract surgery. The studies were at low risk of selection bias, but two of the four studies did not employ masking and only one study included all randomized participants in the final analyses. The funding source was disclosed by investigators of the largest study (professional society) and not reported by the other three. Due to heterogeneity in lens types evaluated and outcomes reported among the trials, we did not combine data in a meta-analysis.In the largest study (140 participants), the study eye of each participant was randomized to receive one of four types of IOLs: hydrophobic acrylic, silicone, HSM PMMA, or unmodified PMMA. Proportions of participants with one or more Snellen lines of visual improvement were similar among the four treatment groups at one year' follow-up: 45 of 48 (94%) in the hydrophobic acrylic IOL group, 39 of 44 (89%) in the silicone IOL group, 18 of 22 (82%) in the HSM PMMA IOL group, and 22 of 26 (85%) in the unmodified PMMA IOL group. When comparing hydrophobic acrylic IOLs with silicone IOLs, the risk ratio (RR) was 1.06 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.20). At one year' follow-up, fewer eyes randomized to hydrophobic acrylic IOLs developed posterior synechiae when compared with eyes receiving silicone IOLs (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.79); the effects between these groups were less certain with respect to developing posterior capsule opacification (PCO) (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.37), corneal edema (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.12), cystoid macular edema (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.84), or mild IOL decentration (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.06 to 14.22).Two intra-individual studies also compared HSM PMMA IOLs with unmodified PMMA IOLs at three or six months of follow-up. These studies, including a combined total of 16 participants with uveitis, were insufficiently powered to detect differences in outcomes among eyes of people with uveitis randomized to receive HSM PMMA IOLs when compared with fellow eyes receiving unmodified PMMA IOLs.In the fourth study (60 participants), the study eye of each participant was randomized to receive a hydrophobic or hydrophilic acrylic IOL. At three months, there were no statistical or clinical differences between hydrophobic and hydrophilic acrylic IOL types in the proportions of participants with two or more Snellen lines of visual improvement (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.22). There were similar rates in the development of PCO between hydrophobic or hydrophilic acrylic IOLs at six months' follow-up (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.25). The effect of the lenses on posterior synechiae was uncertain at six months' follow-up (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.22).None of the included studies reported quality of life outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on the trials identified in this review, there is uncertainty as to which type of IOL provides the best visual and clinical outcomes in people with uveitis undergoing cataract surgery. The studies were small, not all lens materials were compared in all studies, and not all lens materials were available in all study sites. Evidence of a superior effect of hydrophobic acrylic lenses over silicone lenses, specifically for posterior synechiae outcomes comes from a single study at a high risk of performance and detection bias. However, due to small sample sizes and heterogeneity in outcome reporting, we found insufficient information to assess these and other types of IOL materials for cataract surgery for eyes with uveitis.
Topics: Adult; Cataract; Cataract Extraction; Humans; Lenses, Intraocular; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Uveitis; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 24590672
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007284.pub2