Davis Shadi A, Bovelle Renee, Han Genie, Kwagyan John
Ophthalmology and Ocuplastics Surgery, Cheyenne VA Hospital, Cheyenne, Wyoming, USA.
Department of Ophthalmology, Howard University, Washington, DC, USA.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jun 17;6(6):CD013001. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013001.pub2.
Infectious keratitis is an infection of the cornea that can be caused by bacteria, viruses, fungi, protozoa, or parasites. It may be associated with ocular surgery, trauma, contact lens wear, or conditions that cause deficiency or loss of corneal sensation, or suppression of the immune system, such as diabetes, chronic use of topical steroids, or immunomodulatory therapies. Photoactivated chromophore for collagen cross-linking (PACK-CXL) of the cornea is a therapy that has been successful in treating eye conditions such as keratoconus and corneal ectasia. More recently, PACK-CXL has been explored as a treatment option for infectious keratitis.
To determine the comparative effectiveness and safety of PACK-CXL with standard therapy versus standard therapy alone for the treatment of bacterial keratitis.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2019, Issue 7); Ovid MEDLINE; Embase.com; PubMed; Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database (LILACS); ClinicalTrials.gov; and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic search for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 8 July 2019.
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) of PACK-CXL for bacterial keratitis. We included quasi-RCTs and CCTs as we anticipated that there would not be many RCTs eligible for inclusion.
Two review authors working independently selected studies for inclusion in the review, assessed trials for risk of bias, and extracted data. The primary outcome was proportion of participants with complete healing at four to eight weeks. Secondary outcomes included visual acuity, morphology, adverse events, and treatment failure at four to eight weeks.
We included three trials (two RCTs and one quasi-RCT) in this review for a total of 59 participants (59 eyes) with bacterial keratitis. Trials were all single-center and were conducted in Egypt, Iran, and Thailand between 2010 and 2014. It is very uncertain whether PACK-CXL with standard antibiotic therapy is more effective than standard antibiotic therapy alone for re-epithelialization and complete healing (risk ratio (RR) 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 2.66; participants = 15). We judged the certainty of the evidence to be very low due to the small sample size and high risk of selection and performance bias. The high risk of selection bias reflects the overall review. Masking of participants was not possible for the surgical arm. No participant had a best-corrected visual acuity of 20/100 or better at eight weeks (very low certainty evidence). There is also no evidence that use of PACK-CXL with standard therapy results in fewer instances of treatment failure than standard therapy alone (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 4.98; participants = 32). We judged the certainty of evidence to be low due to the small sample size and high risk of selection bias. There were no adverse events reported at 14 days (low certainty evidence). Data on other outcomes, such as visual acuity and morphological characteristics, could not be compared because of variable time points and specific metrics.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence on the effectiveness of PACK-CXL for bacterial keratitis is of low certainty and clinically heterogenous in regard to outcomes. There are five ongoing RCTs enrolling 1136 participants that may provide better answers in the next update of this review. Any future research should include subgroup analyses based on etiology. A core outcomes set would benefit healthcare decision-makers in comparing and understanding study data.
感染性角膜炎是角膜的一种感染,可由细菌、病毒、真菌、原生动物或寄生虫引起。它可能与眼科手术、外伤、佩戴隐形眼镜,或导致角膜感觉减退或丧失、免疫系统抑制的情况有关,如糖尿病、长期局部使用类固醇或免疫调节疗法。角膜的光活化发色团用于胶原交联(PACK-CXL)是一种已成功用于治疗圆锥角膜和角膜扩张等眼部疾病的疗法。最近,PACK-CXL已被探索作为感染性角膜炎的一种治疗选择。
确定PACK-CXL联合标准疗法与单纯标准疗法治疗细菌性角膜炎的相对有效性和安全性。
我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)(其中包含Cochrane眼科和视力试验注册库)(2019年第7期);Ovid MEDLINE;Embase.com;PubMed;拉丁美洲和加勒比健康科学信息数据库(LILACS);ClinicalTrials.gov;以及世界卫生组织(WHO)国际临床试验注册平台(ICTRP)。在电子检索试验时,我们未使用任何日期或语言限制。我们最后一次检索电子数据库是在2019年7月8日。
我们纳入了PACK-CXL治疗细菌性角膜炎的随机对照试验(RCT)、半随机对照试验(quasi-RCT)和对照临床试验(CCT)。我们纳入半随机对照试验和对照临床试验是因为我们预计符合纳入标准的RCT不会很多。
两位综述作者独立选择纳入综述的研究,评估试验的偏倚风险,并提取数据。主要结局是4至8周时完全愈合的参与者比例。次要结局包括视力、形态、不良事件,以及4至8周时的治疗失败情况。
我们在本综述中纳入了3项试验(2项RCT和1项半随机对照试验),共有59名细菌性角膜炎参与者(59只眼)。试验均为单中心试验,于2010年至年在埃及、伊朗和泰国进行。对于再上皮化和完全愈合,PACK-CXL联合标准抗生素疗法是否比单纯标准抗生素疗法更有效非常不确定(风险比(RR)1.53,95%置信区间(CI)0.88至2.66;参与者=15)。由于样本量小以及选择和实施偏倚风险高,我们判断证据的确定性非常低。选择偏倚风险高反映了整体综述情况。手术组无法对参与者进行盲法。在8周时,没有参与者的最佳矫正视力达到20/100或更好(证据确定性非常低)。也没有证据表明PACK-CXL联合标准疗法比单纯标准疗法导致治疗失败的情况更少(RR 0.50,95%CI 0.05至4.98;参与者=32)。由于样本量小以及选择偏倚风险高,我们判断证据的确定性较低。14天时未报告不良事件(证据确定性低)。由于时间点和具体指标不同,无法比较其他结局的数据,如视力和形态特征。
目前关于PACK-CXL治疗细菌性角膜炎有效性的证据确定性低,且在结局方面存在临床异质性。有5项正在进行的RCT,纳入了1136名参与者,可能会在本综述的下一次更新中提供更好的答案。未来的任何研究都应包括基于病因的亚组分析。一个核心结局集将有助于医疗保健决策者比较和理解研究数据。