Joyce Kerry E, Beyer Fiona, Thomson Richard G, Clarke Michael P
Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Claremont Wing Eye Department, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Br J Ophthalmol. 2015 Apr;99(4):440-50. doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2013-304627. Epub 2014 Jul 7.
Evidence of effectiveness of interventions for treatment of childhood intermittent exotropia, X(T), is unclear. We conducted a systematic review to locate, appraise and synthesise evidence of effectiveness, including twelve electronic databases, supplemented with hand searches and expert contact. We included randomised controlled trials, quasi-experimental and cohort studies with a comparison group examining interventions for divergence excess, simulated divergence excess or basic type X(T) in children, up to and including 18 years of age, followed for at least 6 months. Dual data extraction and critical appraisal were conducted and a narrative synthesis undertaken. Eleven studies satisfied the eligibility criteria. Seven examined the comparative effectiveness of two surgical procedures; four compared surgery with other interventions, including botulinum toxin A therapy, orthoptic exercises, occlusion, binocular vision training and watchful waiting. The evidence retrieved was of limited extent and quality with differences across studies in terms of outcome assessment and most appropriate time-point for measuring long-term outcomes. There were mixed outcomes when comparing unilateral recession/resection (R&R) with bilateral lateral rectus recession (BLR) on improving angle of deviation, which makes it difficult to recommend either surgical option with confidence. While non-surgical interventions appear less effective in terms of improving angle of deviation, they are rarely associated with adverse outcomes. Given the limited evidence base, better designed studies are required to address the question of the most effective management for treatment of childhood X(T). Importantly, consensus is required on what constitutes a successful outcome as well as agreement on how this should be measured.
治疗儿童间歇性外斜视(X(T))的干预措施的有效性证据尚不清楚。我们进行了一项系统评价,以查找、评估和综合有效性证据,包括十二个电子数据库,并辅以手工检索和与专家联系。我们纳入了随机对照试验、准实验和队列研究,这些研究设有比较组,考察针对18岁及以下儿童散开过度型、模拟散开过度型或基本型X(T)的干预措施,随访至少6个月。进行了双数据提取和批判性评价,并进行了叙述性综合分析。十一项研究符合纳入标准。七项研究考察了两种手术方法的比较有效性;四项研究将手术与其他干预措施进行了比较,包括肉毒杆菌毒素A治疗、视轴矫正训练、遮盖、双眼视觉训练和观察等待。检索到的证据在范围和质量上有限,不同研究在结局评估和测量长期结局的最合适时间点方面存在差异。在比较单侧后徙/切除术(R&R)和双侧外直肌后徙术(BLR)对改善斜视度的效果时,结果不一,这使得难以自信地推荐任何一种手术方案。虽然非手术干预措施在改善斜视度方面似乎效果较差,但它们很少与不良结局相关。鉴于证据基础有限,需要设计更完善的研究来解决儿童X(T)最有效治疗管理的问题。重要的是,需要就什么构成成功结局达成共识,以及就如何测量这一结局达成一致。