-
Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine Jan 2019The aim of the present systematic review was to assess the efficacy of laser therapy for ischemic central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO). Relevant studies were retrieved...
The aim of the present systematic review was to assess the efficacy of laser therapy for ischemic central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO). Relevant studies were retrieved by searching the PubMed, Embase, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database and, Chinese Science and Technology Periodicals databases using a combination of key words, including 'central retinal vein obstruction', 'CRVO', 'laser' and 'panretinal photocoagulation'. The titles, abstracts and full texts were screened by two independent reviewers and studies were selected according to specific inclusion criteria. Data were extracted and the quality of each study was graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation or Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria. A total of 1,187 abstracts were retrieved, and finally, 11 clinical studies were selected, including 534 cases of CRVO. Of these, 8 studies compared the efficacy of laser therapy with other treatments for CRVO, two studies compared the efficacy of laser therapy and drug treatment for CRVO and one study compared the efficacy of early laser therapy with standard laser therapy (regular examinations and laser therapy performed as soon as neovascularization was identified) for CRVO. Among them, the results of five studies demonstrated that panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) for the prevention of iris neovascularization and neovascular glaucoma is inefficient regarding the improvement of visual acuity. A total of 10 studies indicated that laser therapy achieved better outcomes in neovascularization of the retina, optic disc neovascularization and iris neovascularization, neovascular glaucoma, vitreous hemorrhage, changes in the visual field, macular edema, macular thickness and intraocular pressure. Of note, it was indicated that laser photocoagulation prevents the severe vascular complications of CRVO. In addition, in the eyes of patients receiving PRP for the treatment of ischemic CRVO, significant reductions in corneal sub-basal nerve plexus parameters and average peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer thickness were observed. Furthermore, laser photocoagulation was able to increase retinal blood flow in eyes with ischemic CRVO.
PubMed: 30651879
DOI: 10.3892/etm.2018.7034 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2020To compare anti-vascular growth factor (anti-VEGF) pharmacotherapy with pan-retinal photocoagulation (PRP) for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR).
Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapy as an Alternative or Adjunct to Pan-Retinal Photocoagulation in Treating Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.
AIM
To compare anti-vascular growth factor (anti-VEGF) pharmacotherapy with pan-retinal photocoagulation (PRP) for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR).
METHOD
PubMed, Embase, Medline, the ClinicalTrials.gov and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were reviewed systemically. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) on anti-VEGF therapy versus PRP or anti-VEGF agent combined with PRP versus PRP for PDR are eligible to be included. Outcome measures were regression and recurrence of neovascularization, change in best corrected vision acuity, development of vitreous hemorrhage, and need for vitrectomy. A meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, United Kingdom).
RESULTS
Twelve RCTs with a total of 1026 eyes were identified. The meta-analysis results showed that regression of neovascularization did not vary significantly among different treatment regimens (P=0.06), whereas the recurrence of new vessels was significantly lower in PRP monotherapy (P < 0.00001). The best corrected visual acuity was significantly improved with anti-VEGF monotherapy or in the combined group than in the PRP groups (P < 0.00001, P=0.04, respectively). Odds ratio for post-treatment vitreous hemorrhage and vitrectomy rate between anti-VEGF therapy and PRP were 0.65 (95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.95; P = 0.03), and 0.24 (95% confidence interval, 0.12-0.48; P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION
Our meta-analysis indicates that anti-VEGF pharmacotherapy is associated with superior visual acuity outcomes and less PDR-related complications. However, there is insufficient evidence to suggest anti-VEGF therapy as an alternative to PRP.
PubMed: 32581805
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2020.00849 -
BMJ Open Feb 2021To give a comprehensive efficacy and safety ranking of different therapeutic regimens of ranibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparative efficacy and safety of different regimens of ranibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
OBJECTIVE
To give a comprehensive efficacy and safety ranking of different therapeutic regimens of ranibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).
DESIGN
A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
METHODS
The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and other clinical trial registries were searched up to 1 October 2019 to identify related randomised controlled trials (RCT) of different regimens of ranibizumab for nAMD. The primary efficacy outcome was the changes of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 1 year, the primary safety outcome was the incidence of severe ocular adverse events. Secondary outcomes such as changes of central retinal thickness (CRT) were evaluated. We estimated the standardised mean difference (SMD), ORs, 95% CIs, the surface under the cumulative ranking curves and the mean ranks for each outcome using network meta-analyses with random effects by Stata 14.0.
RESULTS
We identified 26 RCTs involving 10 821 patients with nAMD randomly assigned to 21 different therapeutic regimens of ranibizumab or sham treatment. Ranibizumab 0.5 mg (treat and extend, T&E) is most effective in terms of changes of BCVA (letters, SMD=21.41, 95% CI 19.86 to 22.95) and three or more lines of BCVA improvement (OR=2.83, 95% CI 1.27 to 4.38). However, it could not significantly reduce retreatment times compared with monthly injection (SMD=-0.94, 95% CI -2.26 to 0.39). Ranibizumab 0.5 mg (3+pro re nata)+non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is most effective in reducing CRT and port delivery system of ranibizumab (100 mg/mL) could reduce the number of retreatment most significantly. All regimes have no more risk of severe ocular complications (including vitreous haemorrhage, rhegmatogenous retinal detachment, endophthalmitis, retinal tear and retinal pigment epithelium tear) or cardiocerebral vascular complications.
CONCLUSIONS
Ranibizumab 0.5 mg (T&E) is most effective in improving the visual outcome. The administration of topical NSAIDs could achieve additional efficacy in CRT reduction and visual improvement. Both interventions had acceptable risks of adverse events.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Bevacizumab; Humans; Intravitreal Injections; Macular Degeneration; Network Meta-Analysis; Ranibizumab; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A
PubMed: 33550238
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040906 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2015Postoperative vitreous cavity haemorrhage (POVCH) is a significant complication following vitrectomy for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR). It delays visual... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Postoperative vitreous cavity haemorrhage (POVCH) is a significant complication following vitrectomy for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR). It delays visual recovery and can make further treatment difficult if the view of the fundus is significantly obscured. A number of interventions to reduce the incidence of POVCH have been proposed, including the perioperative use of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF). Anti-VEGFs reduce vascular proliferation and the vascularity of neovascular tissue, which is often the source of bleeding following vitrectomy.
OBJECTIVES
This updated review aimed to summarise the effects of anti-VEGF use to reduce the occurrence of POVCH after vitrectomy surgery for PDR.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (2015, Issue 4), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to May 2015), PubMed (January 1966 to May 2015), EMBASE (January 1980 to May 2015), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences (LILACS) (January 1982 to May 2015), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov), and the 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 26 May 2015.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that looked at the use of anti-VEGFs and the incidence of POVCH in people undergoing vitrectomy for PDR.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Both review authors independently assessed and extracted the data. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.The primary outcomes of the review were the incidence of early and late POVCH following perioperative anti-VEGF administration. Secondary outcomes included best-corrected visual acuity at six months following surgery, the incidence of vitreous cavity washout or revision vitrectomy at six months, adverse effects of intervention (cataract, iris rubeosis and rubeotic glaucoma, retinal detachment, increased inflammation and systemic side effects), quality of life measures performed at least six months following vitrectomy, and density of POVCH.
MAIN RESULTS
The current review included 12 RCTs that looked at the pre- or intraoperative use of intravitreal bevacizumab to prevent postoperative vitreous haemorrhage during pars plana vitrectomy for complications of PDR. The studies were conducted in a variety of countries (three from Iran, two from Italy, two from Egypt, and the remaining from South Korea, USA, Mexico, Pakistan, and Japan). The inclusion criteria for entry into the studies were standard complications of proliferative retinopathy: non-clearing vitreous haemorrhage, tractional retinal detachment involving the macula, or combined tractional rhegmatogenous detachment. The included studies randomised a total of 654 eyes. The average age of the participants was 54 years.We identified methodological issues in all included studies. Risk of bias was highest for masking of participants and investigators (four studies were an 'open label' design), and a number of studies were unclear when describing randomisation methods and sequence allocation.Participants receiving intravitreal bevacizumab in addition to pars plana vitrectomy were less likely to experience early POVCH (grade 2) compared to people undergoing pars plana vitrectomy alone (risk ratio (RR) 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08 to 0.96, 2 studies, 144 eyes, high-quality evidence). This corresponds to an absolute effect of 130 fewer people (95% CI 167 fewer to 7 fewer) with early POVCH per 1000 people when treated with intravitreal bevacizumab. We saw similar results for all grades of POVCH (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.53, 9 studies, 512 eyes) and when excluding cases where assessment of outcome was impossible due to presence of silicone oil (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.60, 6 studies, 302 eyes).The effect of pre- or intraoperative intravitreal bevacizumab on the incidence of late postoperative haemorrhage was uncertain (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.72, 3 studies, 196 eyes, low-quality evidence). The absolute effect was 55 fewer people (95% CI 138 fewer to 143 more) with late POVCH per 1000 people when treated with intravitreal bevacizumab. This outcome was rarer and was only reported in a few studies. We are currently unable to provide an estimate of the effect of intravitreal bevacizumab on postoperative visual acuity due to significant study heterogeneity.No local or systemic complications of intravitreal bevacizumab were reported by the RCTs. The risk of postoperative retinal detachment was lower in the participants treated with pre- or intraoperative bevacizumab (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.08, 7 studies, 372 participants, low-quality evidence); the absolute effect was 49 fewer people (95% CI:73 fewer to 8 more) with postoperative retinal detachment per 1000 people when treated with intravitreal bevacizumab.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The use of pre- or intraoperative bevacizumab lowers the incidence of early POVCH. The reported complications from its use appear to be low. Futher randomised studies that look at other anti-VEGF medications are ongoing and will strengthen the current review findings, giving both surgeons and patients evidence to guide treatment choices in the management of proliferative retinopathy.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Bevacizumab; Diabetic Retinopathy; Humans; Intravitreal Injections; Postoperative Hemorrhage; Preoperative Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factors; Vitrectomy; Vitreous Hemorrhage
PubMed: 26250103
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008214.pub3 -
Journal of Ophthalmic Inflammation and... Jan 2020This study aims to determine if the intravitreal dexamethasone implant (DEX implant, Ozurdex; Allergan, Inc., Irvine, California) is effective for treating intermediate,...
BACKGROUND
This study aims to determine if the intravitreal dexamethasone implant (DEX implant, Ozurdex; Allergan, Inc., Irvine, California) is effective for treating intermediate, posterior, and panuveitis as a monotherapy or adjunctive treatment to systemic immunomodulatory therapies.
METHODS
A systematic review using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed database searches was conducted with the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence criteria to select publications. Available background information and patient data from each study was tabulated. Outcomes studied were central retinal thickness (CRT), best corrected visual acuity, intraocular inflammation (anterior chamber cells, vitreous haze), number of patients with prior and concomitant immunomodulatory treatments, intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation (≥ 25 mmHg), and other adverse effects associated with the implant.
RESULTS
One hundred ninety-five (61.51%) patients had previous immunomodulatory treatment while 232 (64.8%) were treated with concomitant immunomodulatory therapy with the DEX implant. CRT decreased by an average of 198.65 μm (42.74%). Visual acuity improved to an average of 0.451 (logMAR) or 20/57 (Snellen) which is a 43.11% improvement from baseline. One hundred seventy-three (59%) of eyes were quiescent at the end of the trials, of which 40 (13.7%) previously inflamed eyes became quiescent. Elevated IOP occurred in 91 (20.6%). The most common adverse events were cataract/posterior subcapsular opacities in 47 (11.03%) patients and conjunctival hemorrhage in 24 (5.44%) patients.
CONCLUSIONS
The DEX implant is an effective medication for the treatment of posterior segment uveitis, uveitic macular edema, and results in improved visual acuity. Development of elevated IOP and cataract should be closely monitored as they are tangible risks associated with the DEX implant. This study was not able to determine whether the DEX implant was more effective as a monotherapy or as an adjunctive therapy to systemic immunomodulatory treatment.
PubMed: 31925591
DOI: 10.1186/s12348-019-0189-4 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2022To compare the efficacy and safety of panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) combined with intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) against PRP... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To compare the efficacy and safety of panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) combined with intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) against PRP monotherapy for diabetic retinopathy (DR).
METHODS
We searched Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, and Science Direct Register of Controlled Trials from April 2011 to January 2021 to identify the randomized trials that compared the efficacy and safety between PRP combined with intravitreal anti-VEGF and PRP monotherapy for DR. We searched in the following databases between April 2011 and January 2021: Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, and Science Direct without any restriction of countries or article type. The outcome measures were the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), neovascularization on the disc (NVD), neovascularization elsewhere (NVE), central macula thickness (CMT), and total retinal volume over time (FAS), and we also observed the adverse events (AEs) between the two groups.
RESULTS
A total of 351 studies were identified, of which 11 studies were included in this meta-analysis (N = 1,182 eyes). Compared with PRP monotherapy, PRP plus anti-VEGF combination treatment produced a mean reduction in BCVA in units of logMAR of -0.23 [95% CI -0.32, -0.15] or a mean improvement in BCVA in units of letters of 4.99 [95% CI 3.79, 6.19], and also yielded a mean reduction in NVD of -28.41 [95% CI -30.30, -26.52], in NVE of -1.33 [95% CI -1.52, -1.14], in CMT of -1.33 [95% CI -1.52, -1.14], or in total FAS. No significant difference was observed on the risk of AEs as vitreous hemorrhage, elevation in intraocular pressure, and cataract between the two different treatments.
CONCLUSION
PRP with anti-VEGF combination treatment can achieve the ideal efficacy on DR by improving BCVA and NV regression, with no potential increased incidence of AEs, which proves that the combination therapy is an efficient therapeutic strategy that could improve the management of patients with DR.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Diabetes Mellitus; Diabetic Retinopathy; Humans; Laser Coagulation; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 35422768
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2022.807687