central macular thickness

中央黄斑厚度
  • 文章类型: Comparative Study
    这项研究的目的是更好地了解各种药物的疗效,如糖皮质激素和抗血管内皮生长因子(VEGF),在糖尿病性黄斑水肿(DME)的治疗中,并评估由不同治疗措施组成的各种临床治疗方案。
    这项研究包括截至2023年2月的随机对照试验,比较了皮质类固醇相关治疗和抗VEGF治疗的疗效。PubMed,Cochrane图书馆,Embase被搜查了,并仔细评估了研究的质量.最后,共纳入39项研究。
    3个月随访结果显示,玻璃体内注射贝伐单抗(IVB)+曲安奈德(TA)对改善DME患者最佳矫正视力和减少视网膜中央黄斑水肿厚度最有益。6个月随访结果显示,玻璃体腔注射地塞米松(DEX)对改善患者最佳矫正视力和减少黄斑中心性水肿厚度最有效。
    总的来说,IVB+TA在3个月的随访期内有利于改善最佳矫正视力和减少黄斑中心性水肿厚度。而DEX植入物在6个月时比抗VEGF药物具有更好的治疗效果,尤其是严重黄斑水肿和视力受损的患者。
    https://www.crd.约克。AC.uk/PROSPERO/display_record。php?RecordID=397100,标识符CRD42023397100。
    UNASSIGNED: The aim of this study was to better understand the efficacy of various drugs, such as glucocorticoids and anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGF), in the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME), and to evaluate various clinical treatment regimens consisting of different therapeutic measures.
    UNASSIGNED: This study included randomized controlled trials up to February 2023 comparing the efficacy of corticosteroid-related therapy and anti-VEGF therapy. PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase were searched, and the quality of the studies was carefully assessed. Finally, 39 studies were included.
    UNASSIGNED: Results at 3-month followup showed that intravitreal injection of bevacizumab (IVB) + triamcinolone acetonide (TA) was the most beneficial in improving best-corrected visual acuity and reducing the thickness of macular edema in the center of the retina in patients with DME. Results at 6-month follow-up showed that intravitreal dexamethasone (DEX) was the most effective in improving patients\' bestcorrected visual acuity and reducing the thickness of central macular edema.
    UNASSIGNED: Overall, IVB+TA was beneficial in improving best-corrected visual acuity and reducing central macular edema thickness over a 3-month follow-up period, while DEX implants had a better therapeutic effect than anti-VEGF agents at 6 months, especially the patients with severe macular edema and visual acuity impaired.
    UNASSIGNED: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=397100, identifier CRD42023397100.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:玻璃体腔注射抗血管内皮生长因子(IVI抗VEGF)治疗是糖尿病性黄斑水肿(DMO)中心的主要治疗方法。传统的激光治疗(CLT)辅助已被证明是有益的;然而,由于视网膜瘢痕形成的重大风险,它没有被广泛使用。亚阈值微脉冲激光(SML)治疗,然而,作为联合疗法的可比替代品,通过降低视网膜疤痕的风险提供了一个明显的优势。
    方法:检索6个数据库。进行了平均差异的荟萃分析,包括适当的亚组分析。主要结果是12-14个月的注射次数;次要结果是6-8个月和12-14个月的中央黄斑厚度(CMT)和最佳矫正视力(BCVA)的变化。
    结果:本研究共纳入10篇论文,包括6项随机临床试验和4项回顾性临床研究。捕获478名患者的563只眼睛。总的来说,这些研究的偏倚风险适中.在12-14个月时,联合治疗与抗VEGF单一治疗患者相比,在基线时视力差(6/18Snellen或更差)的抗VEGF治疗注射明显减少,平均差异-2.25(95%CI;-3.35,-1.15;p<0.05)。在基线时具有较高视敏度(6/15Snellen或更好)的患者中,联合治疗与显著较少的玻璃体内注射无关。我们的分析还显示BCVA和CMT在基线后6-8个月在95%置信区间达到显著改善:-1.13(-2.09,-0.16)和-4.04(-7.59,-0.50)。这些改善在12-14个月时仍具有统计学意义:联合治疗分别为-0.94(-1.67,-0.20)和-1.92(-3.52,-0.32)。
    结论:我们的发现表明联合治疗(SML+IVI抗VEGF)与较少的玻璃体内注射相关。我们报告了与IVI抗VEGF单一疗法比较物相比,联合治疗在6个月和12个月时BCVA更好,CMT减少。SML是经证实的DMO的非瘢痕形成成本有效的疗法,其应该在医学视网膜疗法中容易获得,因为其可以减轻护理负担。
    BACKGROUND: Intravitreal injection anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (IVI anti-VEGF) therapy serves as the primary treatment for centre involving diabetic macular oedema (DMO). Conventional laser therapy (CLT) adjunct has proven beneficial; however, it is not widely used due to significant risks of retinal scarring. Subthreshold micropulse laser (SML) therapy has, however, emerged as a comparable alternative to combination therapy, offering a distinct advantage by mitigating the risk of retinal scarring.
    METHODS: A search of six databases was conducted. A meta-analysis of mean differences was performed including subgroup analyses where appropriate. Primary outcome was the number of injections at 12-14 months; secondary outcomes were changes in central macular thickness (CMT) and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 6-8 months and 12-14 months.
    RESULTS: A total of ten papers including six randomised clinical trials and four retrospective clinical studies were included in our study, capturing 563 eyes of 478 patients. Overall, the risk of bias was moderate for these studies. Significantly fewer anti-VEGF therapy injections were administered in the combination therapy versus anti-VEGF monotherapy patients at 12-14 months who had poor visual acuity (6/18 Snellen or worse) at baseline, mean difference - 2.25 (95% CI; - 3.35, - 1.15; p < 0.05). Combination therapy was not associated with significantly fewer intravitreal injections in patients with a higher visual acuity (6/15 Snellen or better) at baseline. Our analysis also showed significant improvements to both BCVA and CMT were reached at 6 - 8 month post-baseline at the 95% confidence intervals: - 1.13 (- 2.09, - 0.16) and - 4.04 (- 7.59, - 0.50). These improvements remained statistically significant at 12-14 months: - 0.94 (- 1.67, - 0.20) and - 1.92 (- 3.52, - 0.32) respectively with combination therapy.
    CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that combination therapy (SML + IVI anti-VEGF) is associated with fewer intravitreal injections. We report a better BCVA and a reduction in CMT at 6 and 12 months from baseline with combination treatment compared to the IVI anti-VEGF monotherapy comparator. SML is a proven non-scarring cost-effective therapy for DMO that should be readily available in the medical retinal therapy as it may reduce the burden of care.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:视网膜前膜(ERM)是由玻璃体视网膜表面的细胞化生和增殖形成的非血管纤维细胞组织,通常通过平坦部玻璃体切除术(PPV)进行治疗,有或没有内界膜(ILM)剥离。此网络荟萃分析旨在比较所有可用的ERM去除干预措施的疗效,并评估手术染料在治疗特发性ERM中的使用和疗效。
    方法:MEDLINE,EMBASE,科克伦中部,并检索了美国国家医学图书馆(2023年6月28日)。纳入ERM患者的临床研究。还使用Cochrane偏倚风险(ROB)评估了随机对照试验(RCT)。
    结果:本研究包括10个随机对照试验和10个非随机对照试验。ERM去除与ERM和ILM联合去除之间的成对荟萃分析显示,干预后1年的视觉结果(BCVA变化)没有显着差异(MD=-0.0034,SE=0.16,p=0.832)。同样,两组术后黄斑中心厚度差异无统计学意义(MD=-4.95,SE=11.11,p=0.656)(Q=4.85,df=3,p=0.182,I2=41.21%)。两组间ERM复发差异也无统计学意义(OR=4.64,p=0.062,I2=0)。在网络荟萃分析中,仅去除ERM与其他治疗方式的视觉结局无显著差异:联合去除ILM和ERM(MD=0.039,p=0.837)或观察等待(MD=0.020,p=0.550).在网络荟萃分析中,单独去除ERM与染料染色的ERM和ILM联合剥离之间的视觉结局没有显着差异(对于亮蓝G,MD=0.122,p=0.742;BBG和MD=0.00,对于膜蓝-双;MBD,p=1.00).MBD组是更好的手术染料以获得更好的视觉结果的概率为0.539,BBG组为0.396。当ILM用任何染料染色时,ERM的复发没有显著差异。在ROB评估中没有一项研究被判断为在所有七个域中具有低ROB。
    结论:两种手术方式提供了相当的疗效,结果之间没有显著差异。在染料辅助的ILM剥离方法中,膜蓝-双重染料在提供更好的结构和功能结果方面最有效。
    BACKGROUND: The epiretinal membrane (ERM) is a nonvascular fibrocellular tissue formed by cellular metaplasia and proliferation at the vitreoretinal surface and is generally treated by pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with or without internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling. This network meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy of all available ERM removal interventions and assessed the use and efficacy of surgical dyes in managing idiopathic ERMs.
    METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and the US National Library of Medicine were searched (June 28, 2023). Clinical studies that included patients with ERMs were included. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were also appraised using Cochrane risk of bias (ROB).
    RESULTS: Ten RCTs and ten non-RCTs were included in this study. A pairwise meta-analysis between ERM removal and combined ERM and ILM removal showed no significant difference in visual outcome (change in BCVA) 1 year postintervention (MD = - 0.0034, SE = 0.16, p = 0.832). Similarly, there was no significant difference in the central macular thickness postoperatively between the two groups (MD = - 4.95, SE = 11.11, p = 0.656) (Q = 4.85, df = 3, p = 0.182, I2 = 41.21%). The difference in ERM recurrence between the groups was also not statistically significant (OR = 4.64, p = 0.062, I2 = 0). In a network meta-analysis, there was no significant difference in visual outcomes between ERM removal only and other treatment modalities: combined ILM and ERM removal (MD = 0.039, p = 0.837) or watchful waiting (MD = 0.020, p = 0.550). In a network meta-analysis, there was no significant difference in the visual outcomes between ERM removal alone and dye-stained combined ERM and ILM peeling (MD = 0.122, p = 0.742 for brilliant blue G; BBG and MD = 0.00, p = 1.00 for membrane blue-dual; MBD). The probability of being a better surgical dye for better visual outcomes was 0.539 for the MBD group and 0.396 for the BBG group. The recurrence of ERM was not significantly different when the ILM was stained with any of the dyes. No study was judged on ROB assessment as having low ROB in all seven domains.
    CONCLUSIONS: The two types of surgical modalities provided comparable efficacy, with no significant differences between the outcomes. Among the dye-assisted ILM peeling methods, the membrane blue-dual dye was the most effective in providing better structural and functional outcomes.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    在接受抗血管内皮生长因子(抗VEGF)治疗的糖尿病性黄斑水肿(DME)患者中,通过光学相干断层扫描(OCT)测量的黄斑中心厚度(CMT)与视力(VA)之间的关系。
    2016年至2020年同行评议的文章报道了玻璃体内注射贝伐单抗,雷珠单抗,确定了提供治疗前(基线)和最终视网膜厚度(CMT)和视敏度(VA)数据的阿柏西普.通过控制治疗组的线性随机效应回归模型评估相对变化之间的关系。
    在41项评估2667只眼睛的合格研究中,最小分辨角(logMAR)VA的对数与CMT之间没有显着关联。观察到的效果估计是治疗改变后CMT每减少100µm,logMARVA增加0.12(95%CI,-0.124至2.47)。抗VEGF治疗组之间的logMARVA没有显著差异。
    logMARVA的变化与CMT的变化之间没有统计学上的显着关系,抗VEGF治疗类型对logMARVA的变化也没有显着影响。虽然OCT分析,包括CMT的测量,将继续成为DME管理的一个组成部分,需要进一步探索可能导致视觉结局的其他解剖因素.
    UNASSIGNED: To examine the relationship between central macular thickness (CMT) measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT) and visual acuity (VA) in patients with center-involving diabetic macular edema (DME) receiving antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) treatment.
    UNASSIGNED: Peer-reviewed articles from 2016 to 2020 reporting intravitreal injections of bevacizumab, ranibizumab, or aflibercept that provided data on pretreatment (baseline) and final retinal thickness (CMT) and visual acuity (VA) were identified. The relationship between relative changes was assessed via a linear random-effects regression model controlling for treatment group.
    UNASSIGNED: No significant association between the logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) VA and CMT was found in 41 eligible studies evaluating 2667 eyes. The observed effect estimate was a 0.12 increase (95% CI, -0.124 to 2.47) in logMAR VA per 100 µm reduction in CMT after treatment change. There were no significant differences in logMAR VA between the anti-VEGF treatment groups.
    UNASSIGNED: There was no statistically significant relationship between the change in logMAR VA and change in CMT as well as no significant effect of the type of anti-VEGF treatment on the change in logMAR VA. Although OCT analysis, including measurements of CMT, will continue to be an integral part of the management of DME, further exploration is needed on additional anatomic factors that might contribute to visual outcomes.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    未经证实:白内障超声乳化术是一种有效且广泛的白内障手术技术,但是比较的解剖学结果,包括内皮细胞损失(ECL),中央角膜厚度(CCT),和中央黄斑厚度(CMT),高流量和低流量白内障超声乳化手术之间仍不清楚。
    UNASSIGNED:本研究遵循系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)声明的首选报告项目。随机效应模型用于测量高流量和低流量超声乳化白内障手术之间的解剖结果的合并平均差异(MD)和95%置信区间(CI)。我们根据建议评估的等级来判断证据的总体确定性(CoE),开发和评估(等级)标准。
    UNASSIGNED:我们纳入了6项随机对照试验(RCT),共477名参与者。荟萃分析显示,在术后第2-14天,两种ECL中与这两种手术类型相关的变化相似(MD:-1.63%;95%CI:-3.73至0.47%;CoE:非常低),第15-42天(MD:-0.65%;95%CI-2.96至1.65%;CoE:非常低)和第43天至第18个月(MD:-0.35%;95%CI:-1.48至0.78%;CoE:非常低),术后第1天的CCT(MD:-16.37μm;95%CI:-56.91至24.17μm;CoE:非常低),第2-14天(MD:-10.92μm;95%CI:-30.00至8.16μm;CoE:非常低)和第15-42天(MD:-2.76μm;95%CI:-5.75至0.24μm;CoE:低)。相比之下,低流量超声乳化术在术后第15-42天显示CMT增加较少(MD,-4.58μm;95%CI:-6.3至-2.86μm;CoE:低)。
    未经证实:我们发现相似的解剖结果,除了在CMT,用于高流量和低流量白内障超声乳化手术。未来关于视觉结果的头对头RCT应该证实我们的发现。
    未经批准:PROSPERO,标识符:CRD42022297036。
    UNASSIGNED: Phacoemulsification is an effective and widely performed technique in cataract surgery, but the comparative anatomical outcomes, including endothelial cell loss (ECL), central corneal thickness (CCT), and central macular thickness (CMT), between high-flow and low-flow phacoemulsification cataract surgery remain unclear.
    UNASSIGNED: This study followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement. Random-effects models were applied to measure pooled mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) of anatomical outcomes between high-flow and low-flow phacoemulsification cataract surgery. We judged overall certainty of evidence (CoE) based on Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria.
    UNASSIGNED: We included six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) totaling 477 participants. The meta-analysis showed similar changes associated with these two surgery types in both ECL at postoperative days 2-14 (MD: -1.63%; 95% CI: -3.73 to 0.47%; CoE: very low), days 15-42 (MD: -0.65%; 95% CI -2.96 to 1.65%; CoE: very low) and day 43 to month 18 (MD: -0.35%; 95% CI: -1.48 to 0.78%; CoE: very low), and CCT at postoperative day 1 (MD: -16.37 μm; 95% CI: -56.91 to 24.17 μm; CoE: very low), days 2-14 (MD: -10.92 μm; 95% CI: -30.00 to 8.16 μm; CoE: very low) and days 15-42 (MD: -2.76 μm; 95% CI: -5.75 to 0.24 μm; CoE: low). By contrast, low-flow phacoemulsification showed less increase in CMT at postoperative days 15-42 (MD, -4.58 μm; 95% CI: -6.3 to -2.86 μm; CoE: low).
    UNASSIGNED: We found similar anatomical outcomes, except in CMT, for both high-flow and low-flow phacoemulsification cataract surgery. Future head-to-head RCTs on visual outcomes should confirm our findings.
    UNASSIGNED: PROSPERO, identifier: CRD42022297036.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Case Reports
    目的:通过谱域光学相干断层扫描(SD-OCT)评估已经接受紫杉烷治疗的患者的黄斑视网膜和中心凹下脉络膜改变的特征,并确定紫杉烷相关性黄斑囊样水肿(CME)的发生率。
    方法:在这项横断面病例对照研究中,检查了202例因治疗各种癌症而接受基于紫杉烷的治疗的患者以及年龄和性别匹配的200名健康对照受试者。紫杉烷组仅考虑接受至少4个周期的紫杉烷治疗的患者。基于紫杉烷的治疗进一步分为两个亚组:紫杉醇组(149例患者)和多西他赛组(53例患者)。中央黄斑厚度(CMT)和中央凹下脉络膜厚度(CCT)在其正在进行的化疗期间使用SD-OCT和海德堡OCT由单个检查者进行的增强深度成像(EDI)OCT测量一次。
    结果:患者接受了7个周期的中位数(范围,4-26)的紫杉醇或多西他赛,并接受总累积剂量为852.81±368.82mg/m2(范围,300-2310mg/m2)。尽管紫杉烷组的平均CMT(224.9±28.4µm)明显高于健康对照组(215.9±19.7µm),紫杉醇组(225.3±28.2µm)和多西他赛组(224.2±20.1µm)之间无统计学差异.另一方面,紫杉烷与对照组患者,紫杉醇与多西他赛患者的CCT无统计学差异.仅在一名接受紫杉醇治疗的患者中检测到紫杉烷相关CME。总的来说,紫杉烷组所有患者的紫杉烷相关性黄斑病变发生率为0.5%(1/202).
    结论:在我们接受紫杉烷治疗的患者组中,紫杉烷相关CME的发生率为0.5%。根据我们的研究,我们认为,临床医生应警惕紫杉烷相关CME的发生,并在出现任何怀疑时仔细检查患者.
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the characteristics of macular retinal and subfoveal choroidal changes in patients already on taxane-based therapy by the help of spectral domain optical coherence tomograpy (SD-OCT) and determine the incidence of taxane- related cystoid macular edema (CME).
    METHODS: In this cross-sectional case-control study, 202 patients who received taxane-based therapy due to treatment of various cancer and age and sex-matched 200 healthy control subjects were examined. Only patients who received at least 4 cycles of taxane-based therapy were taken into consideration for the taxane group. Taxane-based therapy was further divided into two subgroups; paclitaxel group (149 patients) and docetaxel group (53 patients). Central macular thickness (CMT) and central subfoveal choroidal thickness (CCT) were measured just once during their ongoing chemotherapy using SD-OCT and enhanced-depth imaging (EDI) OCT by Heidelberg OCT by a single examiner.
    RESULTS: Patients received a median of 7 cycles (range, 4-26) of paclitaxel or docetaxel and received a total cumulative dose of 852.81 ± 368.82 mg/m2 (range, 300-2310 mg/m2). Though the mean CMT was significantly thicker in the taxane group (224.9 ± 28.4 µm) than the healthy control group (215.9 ± 19.7 µm), there was no statistically significant difference between the paclitaxel (225.3 ± 28.2 µm) and docetaxel (224.2 ± 20.1 µm) groups. On the other hand, the CCT was not statistically significant different between the taxane versus control eyes and paclitaxel versus docetaxel patients. Taxane-related CME was detected only in one patient on paclitaxel. Overall, incidence of taxane-related maculopathy was 0.5% (1/202) of all patients in the taxane group.
    CONCLUSIONS: In our group of taxane receiving patients, incidence of taxane-related CME was 0.5%. In light of our study, we believe that clinicians should be alert on the occurence of taxane-related CME and carefully scrutinize the patients whenever any suspicion is arisen.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    BACKGROUND: The evidence on efficacy of intravitreously administered Conbercept (IVC) monotherapy for diabetic macular degeneration was still limited.
    METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in November 2019 to summarize the current evidence on visual acuity (VA) changes with IVC monotherapy in the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) from Pubmed, ClinicalTrials.gov, EMbase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, Chin VIP Information (VIP), and Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM). Retrospective or prospective clinical studies which used IVC injection for the treatment of DME were included. Outcomes included in the analysis were change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT). A meta-regression was conducted to assess 1-year BCVA and CMT changes against numbers of injections.
    RESULTS: A total of 20 studies were included in current study. At 12-month follow-up, an overall increase of 0.67 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) BCVA score [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24-1.11; P = 0.003] and 1.03 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters (95% CI 0.69-1.38; P < 0.001) was shown with IVC injection compared to baseline. Decrease in CMT was 142.79 μm (95% CI 112.71-172.87; P < 0.001) compared to baseline. The meta-regression showed a significant increase in effect size between number of injections and 12-month logMAR BCVA scale change as well as CMT.
    CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest improved VA and CMT outcomes during 1-year follow-up in patients with DME who underwent IVC monotherapy. Increased injection frequency demonstrates a significant trend with improved outcomes at 12 months.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:观察玻璃体腔注射康柏西普(IVC)和雷珠单抗(IVR)治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿的疗效。
    方法:审稿人搜索了12个数据库,包括PubMed,Medline,EMBASE,WebofScience,Springer,ScienceDirect,OVID,科克伦图书馆,ClinicalTrials.gov,cqVIP,万方数据与中国国家知识基础设施(CNKI),截至2018年12月28日。RevMan5.3(Cochrane图书馆软件,牛津,英国)用于统计分析。应用固定效应和随机效应模型评估异质性。赔率比(OR)适用于二分变量;加权平均差(WMD)适用于连续变量。置信区间(CI)设定为95%。采用中央黄斑厚度(CMT)和最佳矫正视力(BCVA)分析DME患者的改善情况。筛选研究的纳入标准是回顾性研究和随机对照试验(RCT),比较IVC和IVR治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿。
    结果:纳入了4项回顾性研究和5项随机对照研究,共609例患者。在基线参数[BCVA(WMD:-0.48;95CI:-1.06至0.10;P=0.1)中,平均CMT和平均BCVA无统计学差异,CMT(WMD:-0.83;95CI:-15.15至13.49;P=0.91)。IVC组BCVA和不良事件(AE)的改善无显著差异。与IVR组治疗后负荷剂量[第1个月BCVA(WMD:0.01;95CI:-0.26至0.27;P=0.96)相比,第3个月BCVA(WMD:-0.04;95CI:-0.14至0.06;P=0.46);第6个月BCVA(WMD:-0.24;95CI:-1.62至1.14;P=0.73)],AE(OR:0.84;95CI:0.38至1.84;P=0.66)]。有效率略有差异(OR:1.70;95CI:0.97至2.96;P=0.06),IVC和IVR治疗在CMT方面有统计学差异[CMT第1个月(WMD:-19.88;95CI:-27.94至-11.82;P<0.001),CMT第3个月(大规模杀伤性武器:-23.31;95CI:-43.30至-3.33;P=0.02),第6个月CMT(WMD:-74.74;95CI:-106.22至-43.26;P<0.001)]。
    结论:汇集的证据表明,IVC和IVR在糖尿病性黄斑水肿的治疗中都是有效的,并确认IVC在糖尿病性黄斑水肿患者的CMT方面优于IVR治疗。但在视觉改善方面无统计学差异。有必要进行长期随访的相关随机对照试验来支持我们的结论。
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of intravitreal injection of conbercept (IVC) and ranibizumab (IVR) in patients with diabetic macular edema.
    METHODS: Reviewers have searched 12 databases, including PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, Springer, ScienceDirect, OVID, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, cqVIP, WanFangdata and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), up to December 28, 2018. RevMan 5.3 (Cochrane Library Software, Oxford, UK) was employed for statistical analysis. Fixed and random effects models were applied to assess heterogeneity. Odds ratio (OR) was applied for dichotomous variables; weighted mean difference (WMD) was applied for continuous variables. The confidence interval (CI) was set at 95%. Central macular thickness (CMT) and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were employed to analyze the improvement of DME patients. Inclusion criteria for picking out studies were retrospective studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared IVC and IVR for the treatment of diabetic macular edema.
    RESULTS: Four retrospective studies and five RCTs were included with a total of 609 patients. No statistically significant difference was observed in mean CMT and mean BCVA in the baseline parameters [BCVA (WMD: -0.48; 95%CI: -1.06 to 0.10; P=0.1), CMT (WMD: -0.83; 95%CI: -15.15 to 13.49; P=0.91). No significant difference was found in the improvement of BCVA and adverse event (AE) in IVC group, compared with IVR group after treatment of loading dosage [the 1st month BCVA (WMD: 0.01; 95%CI: -0.26 to 0.27; P=0.96), the 3rd month BCVA (WMD: -0.04; 95%CI: -0.14 to 0.06; P=0.46); the 6th month BCVA (WMD: -0.24; 95%CI: -1.62 to 1.14; P=0.73)], AE (OR: 0.84; 95%CI: 0.38 to 1.84; P=0.66)]. A slight difference was found in the effectiveness rate (OR: 1.70; 95%CI: 0.97 to 2.96; P=0.06), There were statistically significant differences between IVC and IVR treatment in terms of CMT [1st month CMT (WMD: -19.88; 95%CI: -27.94 to -11.82; P<0.001), 3rd month CMT (WMD: -23.31; 95%CI: -43.30 to -3.33; P=0.02), 6th month CMT (WMD: -74.74; 95%CI: -106.22 to -43.26; P<0.001)].
    CONCLUSIONS: Pooled evidence suggests that both IVC and IVR are effective in the therapy of diabetic macular edema and affirms that IVC presents superiority over IVR therapy in regard of CMT in patients with diabetic macular edema, but no statistically significant difference with regard to visual improvement. Relevant RCTs with longer-term follow-up are necessary to back up our conclusion.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号