-
Frontiers in Neurology 2021By reviewing the existing clinical studies about visual snow (VS) as a symptom or as part of visual snow syndrome (VSS), we aim at improving our understanding of VSS...
By reviewing the existing clinical studies about visual snow (VS) as a symptom or as part of visual snow syndrome (VSS), we aim at improving our understanding of VSS being a network disorder. Patients with VSS suffer from a continuous visual disturbance resembling the view of a badly tuned analog television (i.e., VS) and other visual, as well as non-visual symptoms. These symptoms can persist over years and often strongly impact the quality of life. The exact prevalence is still unknown, but up to 2.2% of the population could be affected. Presently, there is no established treatment, and the underlying pathophysiology is unknown. In recent years, there have been several approaches to identify the brain areas involved and their interplay to explain the complex presentation. We collected the clinical and paraclinical evidence from the currently published original studies on VS and its syndrome by searching PubMed and Google Scholar for the term visual snow. We included original studies in English or German and excluded all reviews, case reports that did not add new information to the topic of this review, and articles that were not retrievable in PubMed or Google Scholar. We grouped the studies according to the methods that were used. Fifty-three studies were found for this review. In VSS, the clinical spectrum includes additional visual disturbances such as excessive floaters, palinopsia, nyctalopia, photophobia, and entoptic phenomena. There is also an association with other perceptual and affective disorders as well as cognitive symptoms. The studies that have been included in this review demonstrate structural, functional, and metabolic alterations in the primary and/or secondary visual areas of the brain. Beyond that, results indicate a disruption in the pre-cortical visual pathways and large-scale networks including the default mode network and the salience network. The combination of the clinical picture and widespread functional and structural alterations in visual and extra-visual areas indicates that the VSS is a network disorder. The involvement of pre-cortical visual structures and attentional networks might result in an impairment of "filtering" and prioritizing stimuli as top-down process with subsequent excessive activation of the visual cortices when exposed to irrelevant external and internal stimuli. Limitations of the existing literature are that not all authors used the ICHD-3 definition of the VSS. Some were referring to the symptom VS, and in many cases, the control groups were not matched for migraine or migraine aura.
PubMed: 34671311
DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2021.724072 -
The British Journal of Ophthalmology Dec 2007The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of currently available topical drugs for vernal keratoconjunctivitis (VKC) through a meta-analysis of randomised... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIMS
The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of currently available topical drugs for vernal keratoconjunctivitis (VKC) through a meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials (RCTs).
METHODS
Twenty-seven RCTs (n = 2184 eyes) that had evaluated the efficacy of topical drugs for the treatment of VKC were selected according to the set criteria; 10 of these trials were suitable for statistical analysis and were enrolled in the meta-analysis. Articles published up to December 2005 were identified from the following
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, Lilacs, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and references from relevant articles. Articles in any language published with an English abstract, were screened, and those selected for inclusion were written in English, French, German, Italian, Portuguese or Spanish. The quality of the trials was assessed by the Delphi list. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA software.
RESULTS
A significant improvement in all signs and symptoms, except photophobia, was observed after topical treatment for active VKC, independent of the type of treatment. Comparison of the efficacy of different drugs was not possible due to a lack of standardised criteria among studies.
CONCLUSION
The currently available topical drugs are effective in treating acute phases of VKC. However, there is a lack of evidence to support the recommendation of one specific type of medication for treating this disorder. There is a need for standard criteria to assess diagnosis and therapy based on severity. There is also a need for RCTs assessing long-term effects of single drugs to control the disease and to prevent complications.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antimitotic Agents; Conjunctivitis, Allergic; Histamine H1 Antagonists; Humans; Immunologic Factors; Mast Cells; Ophthalmic Solutions; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 17588996
DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2007.122044 -
Frontiers in Medicine 2021To evaluate the efficacy and safety of atropine for slowing myopia progression and to investigate whether the treatment effect remains constant with continuing...
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of atropine for slowing myopia progression and to investigate whether the treatment effect remains constant with continuing treatment. Studies were retrieved from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from their inception to May 2021, and the language was limited to English. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies involving atropine in at least one intervention and placebo/non-atropine treatment in another as the control were included and subgroup analysis based on low dose (0.01%), moderate dose (0.01%-<0.5%), and high dose (0.5-1.0%) were conducted. The Cochrane Collaboration and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to evaluate the quality of RCTs and cohort studies, respectively. Twelve RCTs and fifteen cohort studies involving 5,069 children aged 5 to 15 years were included. The weighted mean differences in myopia progression between the atropine and control groups were 0.73 diopters (D), 0.67 D, and 0.35 D per year for high-dose, moderate-dose, and low-dose atropine, respectively (χ = 13.76; = 0.001, = 85.5%). After removing studies that provided extreme findings, atropine demonstrated a significant dose-dependent effect on both refractive change and axial elongation, with higher dosages of atropine resulting in less myopia progression ( = 0.85; = 0.004) and less axial elongation ( = -0.94; = 0.005). Low-dose atropine showed less myopia progression (-0.23 D; = 0.005) and less axial elongation (0.09 mm, < 0.001) in the second year than in the first year, whereas in high-dose atropine more axial elongation (-0.15 mm, = 0.003) was observed. The higher dose of atropine was associated with a higher incidence of adverse effects, such as photophobia with an odds ratio (OR) of 163.57, compared with an OR of 6.04 for low-dose atropine and 8.63 for moderate-dose atropine ( = 0.03). Both the efficacy and adverse effects of atropine are dose-dependent in slowing myopia progression in children. The efficacy of high-dose atropine was reduced after the first year of treatment, whereas low-dose atropine had better efficacy in a longer follow-up period.
PubMed: 35096861
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2021.756398 -
Medicine Sep 2023The last few decades have witnessed an appalling rise in several emerging and re-emerging viral and zoonotic outbreaks. Amongst those emerging zoonosis, one of the...
BACKGROUND
The last few decades have witnessed an appalling rise in several emerging and re-emerging viral and zoonotic outbreaks. Amongst those emerging zoonosis, one of the diseases which is gaining popularity these days and has been declared as public health emergency of international concern by the world health organization, is human monkeypox virus (HMPX). Proper understanding of the clinical spectrum of the disease is of paramount importance for early diagnosis and treatment. In this review, we aimed to study and quantify the neurological manifestations of HMPX virus infection.
METHODS
Any study, released prior to April 13, 2023, that reported neurological manifestations in patients infected by HMPX virus were reviewed systematically on PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis) statement.
RESULTS
Our systematic review included data from 22 eligible studies: 10 cohort studies, 3 cross sectional studies, one retrospective study, 5 case series, and 2 case reports. The most commonly reported neurological manifestations of HMPX were headache (48.84%), myalgia (27.50%), fatigue (17.73%), and photophobia (4.43%). Uncommonly, HMPX can also present with visual deficit (0.57%), seizure (0.34%), encephalitis (0.8%), dizziness (0.34%), encephalomyelitis (0.23%), coma (0.11%), and transverse myelitis (0.11%).
DISCUSSIONS
Monkeypox virus usually presents with self-limiting painful rash, lymphadenitis, and fever, complications like secondary skin infection, eye problems and pneumonia can be life threatening, carrying a case fatality rate of 1% to 10%. Neurological manifestations are not uncommon and can further add-on to morbidity and mortality.
Topics: Humans; Coinfection; Cross-Sectional Studies; Mpox (monkeypox); Monkeypox virus; Public Health; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37657009
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000034664 -
Preventive Medicine Reports Feb 2024COVID-19 caused by SARS-CoV-2, commonly presents with symptoms such as fever and shortness of breath but can also affect other organs. There is growing evidence pointing... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
COVID-19 caused by SARS-CoV-2, commonly presents with symptoms such as fever and shortness of breath but can also affect other organs. There is growing evidence pointing to potential eye complications. In this article, we aim to systematically review the ocular manifestations of COVID-19.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review to explore the ocular manifestations of COVID-19. We searched online databases including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science up to September 4, 2023. After a two-stage screening process and applying inclusion/exclusion criteria, eligible articles were advanced to the data extraction phase. The PRISMA checklist and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) were used for quality and bias risk assessments.
RESULTS
We selected and extracted data from 42 articles. Most of the studies were cross-sectional (n = 33), with the highest number conducted in Turkey (n = 10). The most frequent ocular manifestation was conjunctivitis, reported in 24 articles, followed by photophobia, burning, chemosis, itching, and ocular pain. Most studies reported complete recovery from these manifestations; however, one study mentioned visual loss in two patients.
CONCLUSION
In general, ocular manifestations of COVID-19 appear to resolve either spontaneously or with supportive treatments. For more severe cases, both medical treatment and surgery have been employed, with the outcomes suggesting that complete recoveries are attainable.
PubMed: 38375172
DOI: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2024.102608 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2017Traumatic corneal abrasions are relatively common and there is a lack of consensus about analgesia in their management. It is therefore important to document the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Traumatic corneal abrasions are relatively common and there is a lack of consensus about analgesia in their management. It is therefore important to document the clinical efficacy and safety profile of topical ophthalmic non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the management of traumatic corneal abrasions.
OBJECTIVES
To identify and evaluate all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of topical NSAIDs with placebo or any alternative analgesic interventions in adults with traumatic corneal abrasions (including corneal abrasions arising from foreign body removal), to reduce pain, and its effects on healing time.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2017, Issue 2), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 30 March 2017), Embase Ovid (1947 to 30 March 2017), LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database) (1982 to 30 March 2017), OpenGrey (System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe) (www.opengrey.eu/); searched 30 March 2017, ZETOC (1993 to 30 March 2017), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch); searched 30 March 2017, ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov); searched 30 March 2017 and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en); searched 30 March 2017. We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials.We checked the reference lists of identified trials to search for further potentially relevant studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
RCTs comparing topical NSAIDs to placebo or any alternative analgesic interventions in adults with traumatic corneal abrasions.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently performed data extraction and assessed risks of bias in the included studies. We rated the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included nine studies that met the inclusion criteria, reporting data on 637 participants.The studies took place in the UK, USA, Israel, Italy, France and Portugal. These studies compared five types of topical NSAIDs (0.1% indomethacin, 0.03% flurbiprofen, 0.5% ketorolac, 1% indomethacin, 0.1% diclofenac) to control (consisting of standard care and in four studies used placebo eye drops). Overall, the studies were at an unclear or high risk of bias (particularly selection and reporting bias). None of the included studies reported the primary outcome measures of this review, namely participant-reported pain intensity reduction of 30% or more or 50% or more at 24 hours. Four trials, that included data on 481 participants receiving NSAIDs or control (placebo/standard care), reported on the use of 'rescue' analgesia at 24 hours as a proxy measure of pain control. Topical NSAIDs were associated with a reduction in the need for oral analgesia compared with control (risk ratio (RR) 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34 to 0.61; low-certainty evidence). Approximately 4 out of 10 people in the control group used rescue analgesia at 24 hours. No data were available on the use of analgesia at 48 or 72 hours.One trial (28 participants) reported on the proportion of abrasions healed after 24 and 48 hours. These outcomes were similar in both arms of the trial. (at 24 hours RR 1.00 (0.81 to 1.23); at 48 hours RR 1.00 (0.88 to 1.14); low-certainty evidence). In the control group nine out of 10 abrasions were healed within 24 hours and all were healed by 48 hours. Complications of corneal abrasions were reported in 6 studies (609 participants) and were infrequently reported (4 complications, 1 in NSAID groups (recurrent corneal erosion) and 3 in control groups (2 recurrent corneal erosions and 1 corneal abscess), very low-certainty evidence). Possible drug-related adverse events (AEs) were reported in two trials (163 participants), with the number of adverse events low (4 AEs, 3 in NSAID group, including discomfort/photophobia on instillation, conjunctival hyperaemia and urticaria, and 1 in the control group, corneal abscess) very low-certainty evidence.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The findings of the included studies do not provide strong evidence to support the use of topical NSAIDs in traumatic corneal abrasions. This is important, since NSAIDs are associated with a higher cost compared to oral analgesics. None of the trials addressed our primary outcome measure of participant-reported pain intensity reduction of 30% or more or 50% or more at 24 hours.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Corneal Injuries; Diclofenac; Flurbiprofen; Humans; Indomethacin; Ketorolac; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Wound Healing
PubMed: 28516471
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009781.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2015Seasonal/perennial allergic conjunctivitis is the most common allergic conjunctivitis, usually with acute manifestations when a person is exposed to allergens and with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Seasonal/perennial allergic conjunctivitis is the most common allergic conjunctivitis, usually with acute manifestations when a person is exposed to allergens and with typical signs and symptoms including itching, redness, and tearing. The clinical signs and symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis are mediated by the release of histamine by mast cells. Histamine antagonists (also called antihistamines) inhibit the action of histamine by blocking histamine H1 receptors, antagonising the vasoconstrictor, and to a lesser extent, the vasodilator effects of histamine. Mast cell stabilisers inhibit degranulation and consequently the release of histamine by interrupting the normal chain of intracellular signals. Topical treatments include eye drops with antihistamines, mast cell stabilisers, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, combinations of the previous treatments, and corticosteroids. Standard treatment is based on topical antihistamines alone or topical mast cell stabilisers alone or a combination of treatments. There is clinical uncertainty about the relative efficacy and safety of topical treatment.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this review was to assess the effects of topical antihistamines and mast cell stabilisers, alone or in combination, for use in treating seasonal and perennial allergic conjunctivitis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2014, Issue 7), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to July 2014), EMBASE (January 1980 to July 2014), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), 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 17 July 2014. We also searched the reference lists of review articles and relevant trial reports for details of further relevant publications.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing topical antihistamine and mast cell stabilisers, alone or in combination, with placebo, no treatment or to any other antihistamine or mast cell stabiliser, or both, that examined people with seasonal or perennial allergic conjunctivitis, or both. The primary outcome was any participant-reported evaluation (by questionnaire) of severity of four main ocular symptoms: itching, irritation, watering eye (tearing), and photophobia (dislike of light), both separately and, if possible, by an overall symptom score. We considered any follow-up time between one week and one year.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Disagreements were resolved by discussion among review authors and the involvement of a third review author. We followed standard methodological approaches used by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 30 trials with a total of 4344 participants randomised, with 17 different drugs or treatment comparisons. The following antihistamines and mast cell stabilisers were evaluated in at least one RCT: nedocromil sodium or sodium cromoglycate, olopatadine, ketotifen, azelastine, emedastine, levocabastine (or levocabastine), mequitazine, bepotastine besilate, combination of antazoline and tetryzoline, combination of levocabastine and pemirolast potassium. The most common comparison was azelastine versus placebo (nine studies).We observed a large variability in reporting outcomes. The quality of the studies and reporting was variable, but overall the risk of bias was low. Trials evaluated only short-term effects, with a range of treatment of one to eight weeks. Meta-analysis was only possible in one comparison (olopatadine versus ketotifen). There was some evidence to support that topical antihistamines and mast cell stabilisers reduce symptoms and signs of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis when compared with placebo. There were no reported serious adverse events related to the use of topical antihistamine and mast cell stabilisers treatment.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
It seems that all reported topical antihistamines and mast cell stabilisers reduce symptoms and signs of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis when compared with placebo in the short term. However, there is no long-term data on their efficacy. Direct comparisons of different antihistamines and mast cell stabilisers need to be interpreted with caution. Overall, topical antihistamines and mast cell stabilisers appear to be safe and well tolerated. We observed a large variability in outcomes reported. Poor quality of reporting challenged the synthesis of evidence.
Topics: Anti-Allergic Agents; Conjunctivitis, Allergic; Histamine; Histamine Antagonists; Humans; Mast Cells; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Seasons
PubMed: 26028608
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009566.pub2 -
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 -
Acta Ophthalmologica Feb 2022To systematically review the literature on the treatment of vernal keratoconjunctivitis (VKC) in children and young adults and conduct comparative efficacy analysis on...
PURPOSE
To systematically review the literature on the treatment of vernal keratoconjunctivitis (VKC) in children and young adults and conduct comparative efficacy analysis on clinical signs and symptoms using network meta-analyses.
METHODS
We systematically searched the databases PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central and Web of Science on 21 October 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCT). Studies considered had patients with VKC < 20 years of age randomized into either intervention (any medical intervention) or comparator (active treatment, placebo treatment or non-treatment control), where pre-defined outcomes (data from ≥2 weeks and as close as possible to 2 months) of symptoms (itching, tearing, photophobia and foreign body sensation) and signs (hyperaemia, punctate keratitis, Horner-Trantas dots and macropapillae) were reported. Risk of bias within studies was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Comparisons were made using network meta-analyses.
RESULTS
We identified 39 studies with data on 2046 individuals. Twenty-three studies were eligible for quantitative analyses. None were systemic therapy. Temporal trend analysis showed that an initial focus on topical mast cell stabilizers turned to a focus on calcineurin inhibitors and a more diverse variety of pharmacological strategies. Studies varied in population, treatment duration and quality. The quantitative analysis revealed that efficacy of different therapies differed substantially across important clinical signs and symptoms, but there was a general trend of superior efficacy when using topical corticosteroids with stronger efficacy of the more potent corticosteroids.
CONCLUSION
We provide an overview of RCTs comparing the efficacy of treatments for VKC in children and young adults, which we find differs across symptoms and signs. Overall, we saw a general trend of superior efficacy with topical corticosteroids. However, our findings highlight the need for better studies, consensus on core outcomes and potential for individualized therapy.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Child; Conjunctivitis, Allergic; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 33779061
DOI: 10.1111/aos.14858 -
Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia Sep 2019This systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness of using preservative-free artificial tears versus preserved lubricants for the treatment of dry eyes in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
This systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness of using preservative-free artificial tears versus preserved lubricants for the treatment of dry eyes in Universidade Federal de Alagoas (PROSPERO 2018 CRD42018089933). Online databases were searched (LILACS, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL) from inception to April 2018; references from included papers were also searched. The following keywords were used: lubricants OR artificial tears OR artificial tears, lubricants AND dry eye OR dry eye syndrome OR syndromes, dry eye OR dry eyes. Among the 2028 electronic search results, 29 full papers were retrieved and four were considered relevant. The number of participants from these studies ranged from 15 to 76. Meta-analysis was possible for the following outcomes: score of symptoms according to the Ocular Surface Disease Index - Allergan (OSDI), tear secretion rate using the Schirmer test, tear evaporation rate using the tear film breakup time test, burning, foreign body sensation, and photophobia. No statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups, and no side effects were attributed to the interventions. Evidence proving that preservative-free artificial tears are more effective than preserved artificial tears is lacking.
Topics: Bias; Dry Eye Syndromes; Female; Humans; Lubricant Eye Drops; Male; Ophthalmic Solutions; Preservatives, Pharmaceutical; Tears
PubMed: 31508669
DOI: 10.5935/0004-2749.20190097