Shchomak Zakhar, Cordeiro Sousa David, Leal Inês, Abegão Pinto Luís
Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de Lisboa, 1649-028, Lisbon, Portugal.
Department of Ophthalmology, Hospital Santa Maria, Av Prof. Dr. Egas Moniz, 1649-035, Lisbon, Portugal.
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2019 Jun;257(6):1079-1089. doi: 10.1007/s00417-019-04256-8. Epub 2019 Feb 6.
This literature review and meta-analysis aims to compare intraocular pressure (IOP) lowering efficacy, failure rates and loss of light perception (LP) rates 6 months after an IOP-lowering surgical procedure in neovascular glaucoma (NVG) eyes.
MEDLINE and EMBASE were used as data sources. Only studies including NVG patients who underwent two different surgical approaches were considered. The treatment effect measures were (i) weighted mean difference (WMD) for IOP reduction, (ii) risk ratio (RR) for failure rates and (iii) risk difference (RD) for loss of LP. Outcome measures were reported with a 95% confidence interval (CI) and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Analysis was performed using RevMan v5.0.
No RCT were retrieved. Seven comparative non-randomised studies were eligible. In glaucoma drainage devices (GDDs) vs cyclophotocoagulation arm, there was no statistical difference in IOP-lowering efficacy (WMD = - 3.63; CI [- 8.69, 1.43], P = 0.16), although failure rates and loss of LP were lower in the GDDs group (RR = 0.64, CI [0.41, 0.99], P = 0.05; and RD = - 0.15, CI [- 0.25, - 0.05], P = 0.004, respectively). In the Ahmed glaucoma valve (AGV) vs trabeculectomy arm, there was no statistical difference in IOP-lowering efficacy and loss of LP (WMD = 0.78, CI [- 2.29, 3.85], P = 0.62 and RD of 0.04, CI [- 0.05, 0.14], P = 0.34, respectively), but failure rates were lower in trabeculectomy group (RR of 2.25, CI [1.14, 3.71], P = 0.02).
There is lack of high-quality evidence on the subject as no RCT were retrieved comparing two different IOP-lowering procedures in NVG patients. Our findings are based, therefore, on non-RCT studies and should be interpreted with caution. There appears to be no difference in IOP-lowering efficacy between GDDs and cyclophotocoagulation, although GDDs appear to be safer. AGV and trabeculectomy also seem to provide similar IOP-lowering results with trabeculectomy showing lower failure rates.
本综述及荟萃分析旨在比较新生血管性青光眼(NVG)患者眼压降低手术6个月后的眼压降低疗效、失败率及无光感(LP)发生率。
以MEDLINE和EMBASE作为数据源。仅纳入包含接受两种不同手术方式的NVG患者的研究。治疗效果指标为:(i)眼压降低的加权均数差(WMD);(ii)失败率的风险比(RR);(iii)无光感发生率的风险差(RD)。结果指标以95%置信区间(CI)报告,P<0.05被认为具有统计学意义。使用RevMan v5.0进行分析。
未检索到随机对照试验(RCT)。七项比较性非随机研究符合纳入标准。在青光眼引流装置(GDDs)与睫状体光凝术组中,眼压降低疗效无统计学差异(WMD=-3.63;CI[-8.69,1.43],P=0.16),尽管GDDs组的失败率和无光感发生率较低(RR=0.64,CI[0.41,0.99],P=0.05;RD=-0.15,CI[-0.25,-0.05],P=0.004)。在艾哈迈德青光眼阀(AGV)与小梁切除术组中,眼压降低疗效和无光感发生率无统计学差异(WMD=0.78,CI[-2.29,3.85],P=0.62;RD为0.04,CI[-0.05,0.14],P=0.34),但小梁切除术组的失败率较低(RR为2.25,CI[1.14,3.71],P=0.02)。
由于未检索到比较NVG患者两种不同眼压降低手术的RCT,因此缺乏关于该主题的高质量证据。因此,我们的研究结果基于非RCT研究,应谨慎解读。GDDs与睫状体光凝术在眼压降低疗效上似乎无差异,尽管GDDs似乎更安全。AGV和小梁切除术似乎也能提供相似的眼压降低效果,小梁切除术的失败率较低。