-
European Journal of Ophthalmology May 2024To review all studies reporting the occurrence of white dot syndromes (WDSs) following SARS-COV-2 infection. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To review all studies reporting the occurrence of white dot syndromes (WDSs) following SARS-COV-2 infection.
METHODS
On May 12, 2023, we registered our protocol on PROSPERO [registration number: CRD42023426012]. Five different databases including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Science Direct were searched up to May 2023. We included all studies that reported the symptoms of WDSs following SARS-COV-2 infection. The data was extracted using a uniform Excel extraction sheet. All statistical tests were conducted with a 95% confidence interval and a 5% error margin. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. The publication bias of included studies was assessed using JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Case Reports and IHE Quality Appraisal Checklist for Case Series studies.
RESULTS
This review included thirty-two studies involving forty-eight patients. Acute macular neuroretinopathy was the most common disease (70.8%) followed by multiple evanescent white dot syndrome (14.6%) with 58.3% of WDS after their first SARS-COV-2 infection, and paracentral acute middle maculopathy (4.1%). They were mostly unilateral (56.2%). The presenting symptoms were blurred vision (70.8%), visual field disturbance (68.7%), and photopsia (20.8%). About 35.4% of the patients improved by their treatment and future complications were persistent scotoma (4.2%) and macular edema (2.1%).
CONCLUSION
White dot syndromes are very rare entities. Our findings suggest a possible association between white dot syndrome onset and SARS-COV-2 infection. We recommend ophthalmologists should be aware of this suggested association to deliver better management and patients' care.
PubMed: 38751139
DOI: 10.1177/11206721241255402 -
International Ophthalmology Apr 2024To review all studies reporting the onset of white dot syndromes following COVID-19 vaccines. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To review all studies reporting the onset of white dot syndromes following COVID-19 vaccines.
METHODS
Our protocol was registered prospectively on PROSPERO [registration number: CRD42023426012]. We searched five different databases including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Science Direct up to May 2023. All the studies that reported the occurrence of white dot syndrome following COVID-19 vaccines were included. All statistical tests were conducted with a 95% confidence interval and a 5% error margin. A p value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. The methodological quality of included studies was performed using the IHE Quality Appraisal Checklist for Case Series studies and JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Case Reports.
RESULTS
Fifty studies involving seventy-one subjects were included. Multiple evanescent white dot syndrome (MEWDS) was the most common disease (n = 25, 35.2% %), followed by acute macular neuroretinopathy (AMN) (n = 22, 31.0%) and acute posterior multifocal placoid pigment epitheliopathy (APMPPE) (n = 4, 5.6%). They were mostly unilateral (n = 50, 70.4%). The presenting symptoms were blurred vision (n = 26, 36.6%), paracentral scotoma (n = 19, 26.8%), visual field disturbance, and photopsia (n = 7, 9.9%). The mean duration for follow-up was 10.15 ± 14.04 weeks. Nineteen subjects (29.69%) received steroids with improvement reported in 68.4%. Eleven subjects (17.19%) were managed by observation only with reported full recovery and improvement.
CONCLUSION
White dot syndromes are very rare entities. Our findings highlight a possible association between COVID-19 vaccines and the occurrence of white dot syndromes. However, larger studies with good quality should be implemented to confirm these findings.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; SARS-CoV-2; Tomography, Optical Coherence; White Dot Syndromes
PubMed: 38652153
DOI: 10.1007/s10792-024-03119-4 -
Current Ophthalmology Reports Dec 2022
PubMed: 36742288
DOI: 10.1007/s40135-022-00305-4 -
BMJ Open Ophthalmology 2022To demonstrate the spectrum of autoimmune retinopathy (AIR) associated with immunotherapy for advanced cutaneous melanoma.
Autoimmune retinopathy with associated anti-retinal antibodies as a potential immune-related adverse event associated with immunotherapy in patients with advanced cutaneous melanoma: case series and systematic review.
OBJECTIVE
To demonstrate the spectrum of autoimmune retinopathy (AIR) associated with immunotherapy for advanced cutaneous melanoma.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS
Retrospective chart review on patients with advanced cutaneous melanoma who developed AIR after initiating immunotherapy. Complete ophthalmic examination and relevant ancillary testing were performed on each patient. The presence of AIR-associated anti-retinal antibodies was confirmed by western blot and/or immunohistochemical staining. Ophthalmic and systemic outcomes after treatment for AIR were followed over time. A systematic review of AIR associated with immunotherapy for cutaneous or non-ocular mucosal melanoma was carried out in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
RESULTS
Case 1 developed photopsia and nyctalopia with electroretinographic findings characteristic for melanoma-associated retinopathy 1 week after initiating ipilimumab/nivolumab immunotherapy. Case 2 experienced new severe bilateral visual field loss associated with anti-retinal and anti-optic nerve antibodies while on maintenance nivolumab immunotherapy. Case 3 developed decreased visual acuity due to acute exudative polymorphous vitelliform maculopathy within 2 weeks of initiating ipilimumab/nivolumab immunotherapy. All patients had concurrent extraocular immune-related adverse events in addition to the presence of anti-retinal antibodies on serological testing. 14 published cases of AIR associated with immunotherapy for cutaneous or non-ocular mucosal melanoma were identified and reviewed.
CONCLUSIONS
Immune checkpoint inhibition can trigger the development of AIR with varied clinical manifestations in patients with advanced cutaneous melanoma. This study highlights the need for close monitoring in cutaneous melanoma patients receiving immunotherapy who develop new visual symptoms with or without funduscopic changes, as well as the potential role for screening of patients prior to initiating immunotherapy.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Autoimmune Diseases; Humans; Immunologic Factors; Immunotherapy; Ipilimumab; Melanoma; Nivolumab; Retinal Diseases; Retrospective Studies; Skin Neoplasms; Melanoma, Cutaneous Malignant
PubMed: 35047671
DOI: 10.1136/bmjophth-2021-000889 -
Survey of Ophthalmology 2022Ocriplasmin is used to treat vitreomacular traction (VMT), with or without full-thickness macular hole (MH). We systematically reviewed the evidence on ocriplasmin's... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Ocriplasmin for treatment of vitreomacular traction and macular hole: A systematic literature review and individual participant data meta-analysis of randomized, controlled, double-masked trials.
Ocriplasmin is used to treat vitreomacular traction (VMT), with or without full-thickness macular hole (MH). We systematically reviewed the evidence on ocriplasmin's effect on vitreomacular adhesion resolution (VMAR), MH closure, vitrectomy, and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and investigated the effect of baseline covariates on outcome. We applied individual participant data meta-analyses to the entire population and to subgroups defined by MH or epiretinal membrane (ERM) presence. Safety data were pooled and tabulated. Five randomized controlled trials (1,067 participants) were included. Six months after treatment, ocriplasmin achieved higher rates of VMAR and MH closure versus control, lowered vitrectomy odds, and increased the likelihood of a ≥10-letter BCVA increase. VMAR rates were lower when ERM, broad VMA (> 1500 µm), diabetic retinopathy, or pseudophakia were present and higher in younger participants, women, and eyes with MHs. Ocriplasmin-treated participants experienced more short-term visual impairment that was not predictive of final BCVA, as well as vitreous floaters, photopsia, photophobia, eye pain, blurred vision, and dyschromatopsia. The most common serious adverse events for ocriplasmin and control, respectively, were MH progression (22.5%, 17.3%), new MH (1.5%, 3.4%) and retinal detachment (0.8%, 1.2%). Ocriplasmin promotes VMAR and MH closure. Transient visual phenomena are not uncommon.
Topics: Female; Fibrinolysin; Humans; Intravitreal Injections; Peptide Fragments; Retinal Diseases; Retinal Perforations; Tomography, Optical Coherence; Traction; Treatment Outcome; Vision Disorders; Visual Acuity; Vitreous Body; Vitreous Detachment
PubMed: 34480895
DOI: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2021.08.003 -
Acta Ophthalmologica Sep 2021Effectiveness of ocriplasmin for vitreomacular traction (VMT) varies depending on the presence of common ocular conditions and patient selection criteria. We carried out... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Effectiveness of ocriplasmin for vitreomacular traction (VMT) varies depending on the presence of common ocular conditions and patient selection criteria. We carried out a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of ocriplasmin studies conducted in real-world settings (RWS) and compared outcomes with those from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS
We included prospective and retrospective studies from RWS documenting effectiveness of ocriplasmin in patients with VMT with or without MH, and RCTs of ocriplasmin versus control. Key end-points were vitreomacular adhesion resolution (VMAR), nonsurgical MH closure, need for vitrectomy and safety. We conducted meta-regression on pooled results to evaluate effects of baseline covariates and study design on outcomes.
RESULTS
Thirty RWS (2402 patients) and 5 RCTs (737 patients) were included epiretinal membrane (ERM) and broad VMA were more prevalent in RCTs. Primary VMAR, vitrectomy and MH closure rates were comparable between RWS and RCTs. Rates of nsVMAR were significantly higher in RWS than RCTs (odds ratio 1.66; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.18-2.34). nsVMAR rates were inversely associated with ERM prevalence (odds ratio 0.20; 95% CI: 0.08-0.51). Compared with the recent OASIS trial, RWS reported a higher incidence of new/worsening subretinal fluid cases and less photophobia, photopsia, vitreous floaters, electroretinogram abnormalities and MH progression.
CONCLUSIONS
Ocriplasmin was significantly more effective in achieving nsVMAR in RWS than in RCTs. Lower ERM prevalence in RWS was the single significant explanatory variable for this difference. Conclusions on ocriplasmin safety in RWS are limited due to inconsistent reporting.
Topics: Fibrinolysin; Humans; Intravitreal Injections; Peptide Fragments; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Retinal Diseases; Tomography, Optical Coherence; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 33369248
DOI: 10.1111/aos.14686 -
Open Heart Oct 2020To determine the impact of ivabradine on outcomes important to patients with angina pectoris caused by coronary artery disease. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Effects of adding ivabradine to usual care in patients with angina pectoris: a systematic review of randomised clinical trials with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the impact of ivabradine on outcomes important to patients with angina pectoris caused by coronary artery disease.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review. We included randomised clinical trials comparing ivabradine versus placebo or no intervention for patients with angina pectoris due to coronary artery disease published prior to June 2020. We used Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, Cochrane methodology, Trial Sequential Analysis, Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation, and our eight-step procedure. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events and quality of life.
RESULTS
We included 47 randomised clinical trials enrolling 35 797 participants. All trials and outcomes were at high risk of bias. Ivabradine compared with control did not have effects when assessing all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR] 1.04; 95% CI 0.96 to 1.13), quality of life (standardised mean differences -0.05; 95% CI -0.11 to 0.01), cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.07; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.18) and myocardial infarction (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.91 to 1.16). Ivabradine seemed to increase the risk of serious adverse events after removal of outliers (RR 1.07; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.11) as well as the following adverse events classified as serious: bradycardia, prolonged QT interval, photopsia, atrial fibrillation and hypertension. Ivabradine also increased the risk of non-serious adverse events (RR 1.13; 95% CI 1.11 to 1.16). Ivabradine might have a statistically significant effect when assessing angina frequency (mean difference (MD) 2.06; 95% CI 0.82 to 3.30) and stability (MD 1.48; 95% CI 0.07 to 2.89), but the effect sizes seemed minimal and possibly without any relevance to patients, and we identified several methodological limitations, questioning the validity of these results.
CONCLUSION
Our findings do not support that ivabradine offers significant benefits on patient important outcomes, but rather seems to increase the risk of serious adverse events such as atrial fibrillation and non-serious adverse events. Based on current evidence, guidelines need reassessment and the use of ivabradine for angina pectoris should be reconsidered.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42018112082.
Topics: Aged; Angina Pectoris; Cardiovascular Agents; Female; Humans; Ivabradine; Male; Middle Aged; Patient Safety; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33046592
DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2020-001288 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2017Symptomatic vitreomacular adhesion (sVMA) is a recognised cause of visual loss and by tradition has been managed by pars plana vitrectomy (PPV). A less invasive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Symptomatic vitreomacular adhesion (sVMA) is a recognised cause of visual loss and by tradition has been managed by pars plana vitrectomy (PPV). A less invasive alternative to surgery in some people is enzymatic vitreolysis, using an intravitreal injection of ocriplasmin.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of ocriplasmin compared to no treatment, sham or placebo for the treatment of sVMA.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2017, Issue 1), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 24 February 2017), Embase Ovid (1947 to 24 February 2017), PubMed (1946 to 24 February 2017), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch); searched 24 February 2017, ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov); searched 24 February 2017 and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en); searched 24 February 2017. We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of people with sVMA. The intervention was intravitreal ocriplasmin 125 μg injection, and this was compared to placebo or sham injection (control). Placebo was defined as a single intravitreal injection of 0.10 mL placebo with identical drug vehicle diluted with saline. A sham injection was defined as the syringe hub or blunt needle touching the conjunctiva to simulate an injection.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently selected relevant trials, assessed methodological quality and extracted data. We graded the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
This review included four RCTs conducted in Europe and the USA with a total of 932 eyes of 932 participants. Participants were 18 to 97 years of age, with evidence of focal vitreomacular adhesion (VMA) on optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging, with a best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of 20/25 or worse in the study eye and 20/400 or better in the fellow eye. The interventions compared were intravitreal ocriplasmin versus sham (two RCTs) or placebo (two RCTs) injection. Both sham and placebo injection were classified as the control group. The main outcome measures were assessed at 28 days and six months. Overall, we judged the studies to have a low or unclear risk of bias. All four RCTs were sponsored by the manufacturers of ocriplasmin.Compared with control, ocriplasmin treatment was more likely to result in VMA release within 28 days (risk ratio (RR) 3.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.00 to 6.00; 859 eyes, 4 RCTs, high-certainty evidence). Approximately 97/1000 eyes will have VMA release within 28 days without treatment. An additional 237 eyes will have VMA release within 28 days for every 1000 eyes treated with ocriplasmin (95% CI 96 more to 482 more).Treatment with ocriplasmin was also more likely to result in macular hole closure (RR 2.87, 95% CI 1.50 to 5.51; 229 eyes, 3 RCTs, high-certainty evidence). Approximately 123/1000 eyes with macular holes will have closure with no treatment. An additional 231 eyes will have macular hole closure for every 1000 eyes treated with ocriplasmin (95% CI 62 more to 556 more).Eyes receiving ocriplasmin were also more likely to have complete posterior vitreous detachment (PVD) within 28 days (RR 2.94, 95% CI 1.39 to 6.24; 689 eyes, 3 RCTs, high-certainty evidence). Approximately 40/1000 eyes will have complete PVD within 28 days without treatment. An additional 78 eyes will have complete PVD within 28 days for every 1000 eyes treated with ocriplasmin (95% CI 16 more to 210 more).Eyes receiving ocriplasmin were more likely to achieve 3-line or greater improvement in BCVA at six months (RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.53; 674 eyes, 3 RCTs, moderate-certainty evidence). Approximately 61/1000 eyes will have a 3-line or greater improvement in BCVA at six months without treatment. An additional 58 eyes will have 3-line or greater improvement in BCVA at six months for every 1000 eyes treated with ocriplasmin (95% CI 9 more to 154 more).Receiving ocriplasmin also reduced the requirement for vitrectomy at six months (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.91; 689 eyes, 3 RCTs, moderate-certainty evidence). Approximately 265/1000 eyes will require vitrectomy at six months without treatment and 87 fewer eyes will require vitrectomy for every 1000 eyes treated with ocriplasmin (95% CI 24 fewer to 132 fewer).Treatment with ocriplasmin resulted in a greater improvement in validated Visual Function Questionnaire form score at six months (mean improvement difference 2.7 points, 95% CI 0.8 to 4.6; 652 eyes, 2 RCTs, moderate-certainty evidence).Eyes receiving ocriplasmin were more likely to have an adverse event (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.37, 909 eyes, 4 RCTs, moderate-certainty evidence). Approximately 571/1000 eyes will have an adverse event with sham or placebo injection and 106 more eyes will have an adverse event for every 1000 eyes treated with ocriplasmin (95% CI 52 more to 212 more).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Evidence from a limited number of RCTs suggests that ocriplasmin is useful in the treatment of sVMA. However, up to 20% of eyes treated with ocriplasmin will still require additional treatment with PPV within six months. There were more ocular adverse events in eyes treated with ocriplasmin than control (sham or placebo injection) treatment. Many of these adverse events, particularly vitreous floaters and photopsia, are known to be associated with posterior vitreous detachment. At present however, there is minimal published long-term safety data on eyes treated with ocriplasmin. Further large RCTs comparing ocriplasmin with other management options for sVMA would be beneficial.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Fibrinolysin; Fibrinolytic Agents; Humans; Intravitreal Injections; Middle Aged; Peptide Fragments; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Retinal Diseases; Time Factors; Tissue Adhesions; Visual Acuity; Vitrectomy; Vitreous Body; Vitreous Detachment
PubMed: 29040800
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011874.pub2 -
Graefe's Archive For Clinical and... Jul 2016We aimed to provide a meta-analysis of the factors affecting vitreomacular traction (VMT) resolution after ocriplasmin use. A comprehensive systematic review of the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Ocriplasmin use for vitreomacular traction and macular hole: A meta-analysis and comprehensive review on predictive factors for vitreous release and potential complications.
PURPOSE
We aimed to provide a meta-analysis of the factors affecting vitreomacular traction (VMT) resolution after ocriplasmin use. A comprehensive systematic review of the complications after ocriplasmin use for VMT and macular hole was also done.
METHODS
A literature search in PubMed was performed for studies about ocriplasmin published before 30 June 2015. Then a meta-analysis of the factors affecting the VMT resolution after ocriplasmin use was done, providing the pooled odds ratios for each factor and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). We also described the potential adverse events after ocriplasmin use in a systematic review.
RESULTS
A total of 194 abstracts were screened and 19 eligible studies were included in the meta-analysis. Age <65 years, female gender, vitreomacular adhesion diameter <1500 μm, phakic lens status and epiretinal membrane absence were found as positive predictive factors for VMT resolution, while macular hole size <250 μm was significantly associated with macular hole closure at the meta-analytical level. Various complications after ocriplasmin use were reported by frequency, including mainly vitreous floaters, photopsias, visual acuity decrease, ellipsoid zone changes, subretinal fluid development, enlargement of macular hole, anterior segment changes and electroretinogram alterations. It has to be noted that significant methodological weaknesses were identified, such as the absence of control groups or lack of transparency in the recruitment process and the examination procedure.
CONCLUSIONS
It is important to carefully select patients for ocriplasmin injection, taking into account the various predictive factors for VMT resolution. Patients should be informed about the potential adverse events of ocriplasmin, although they mainly seemed to be transient and usually mild/moderate in severity, suggesting that ocriplasmin is a safe and effective new treatment alternative for VMT and macular hole. However, due to the limited study quality, the uncertainty concerning the efficacy of this new approach is increased.
Topics: Fibrinolysin; Humans; Intravitreal Injections; Peptide Fragments; Retinal Perforations; Treatment Outcome; Vitreous Detachment
PubMed: 27137631
DOI: 10.1007/s00417-016-3363-5