Suppr超能文献

玻璃体腔内抗血管内皮生长因子注射与激光光凝治疗早产儿视网膜病变:3701 只眼的荟萃分析。

Intravitreal antivascular endothelial growth factor injection versus laser photocoagulation for retinopathy of prematurity: A meta-analysis of 3,701 eyes.

机构信息

Department of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

Surv Ophthalmol. 2021 Jul-Aug;66(4):572-584. doi: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2020.12.002. Epub 2020 Dec 16.

Abstract

We investigate the efficacy and safety of intravitreal injection (IVI) of antivascular endothelial growth factor agents and laser photocoagulation (LPC) for retinopathy of prematurity. We performed a systematic search of Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL (2005-2019). Comparative studies reporting on ocular efficacy and/or safety outcomes after IVIs and LPC for retinopathy of prematurity were included. The primary outcome was the regression rate, whereas secondary endpoints included the likelihood of requiring additional treatment, visual and refractive outcomes, and complications. Overall, 777 publications were identified. Twenty-four articles were included, with 1,289 eyes receiving IVI and 2,412 eyes undergoing LPC. There was no significant difference in the regression rate between IVI and LPC (P = 0.68); however, eyes that underwent IVI were associated with a significantly higher likelihood of requiring additional treatment (risk ratio = 2.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) = [1.26, 3.73], P = 0.005) and longer time from treatment to retreatment or recurrence (weighted mean difference = 6.43 weeks, 95% CI = [2.36, 10.51], P = 0.002). Eyes receiving IVI required surgical intervention significantly less often (risk ratio = 0.45, 95% CI = [0.23, 0.89], P = 0.02). Astigmatism was significantly lower after IVI relative to LPC (weighted mean difference = -0.25 D, 95% CI = [-0.45, -0.06], P = 0.01), and there was a lower proportion of emmetropic eyes at last follow-up after LPC (risk ratio = 0.51, 95% CI = [0.27, 0.99], P = 0.05). There were no differences in visual and safety outcomes between IVI and LPC. LPC had a lower likelihood of requiring additional treatment, whereas IVIs were associated with a longer interval from treatment to retreatment or recurrence, reduced risk of surgical intervention and superior refractive outcomes. All other outcomes were comparable between IVIs and LPC.

摘要

我们研究了玻璃体内注射(IVI)抗血管内皮生长因子药物和激光光凝(LPC)治疗早产儿视网膜病变的疗效和安全性。我们对 Ovid MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 Cochrane CENTRAL(2005-2019 年)进行了系统检索。纳入了报告 IVI 和 LPC 治疗早产儿视网膜病变后眼部疗效和/或安全性结果的比较研究。主要结局为消退率,次要结局包括需要额外治疗的可能性、视力和屈光结果以及并发症。总共确定了 777 篇出版物。24 篇文章入选,1289 只眼接受 IVI,2412 只眼接受 LPC。IVI 和 LPC 的消退率无显著差异(P=0.68);然而,接受 IVI 的眼需要额外治疗的可能性显著更高(风险比=2.16,95%置信区间(CI)=[1.26,3.73],P=0.005),从治疗到再次治疗或复发的时间也更长(加权均数差=6.43 周,95%CI=[2.36,10.51],P=0.002)。接受 IVI 的眼需要手术干预的频率显著较低(风险比=0.45,95%CI=[0.23,0.89],P=0.02)。与 LPC 相比,IVI 后的散光明显较低(加权均数差=-0.25 D,95%CI=[-0.45,-0.06],P=0.01),并且 LPC 最后一次随访时正视眼的比例较低(风险比=0.51,95%CI=[0.27,0.99],P=0.05)。IVI 和 LPC 之间的视力和安全性结果无差异。LPC 不太可能需要额外的治疗,而 IVI 与治疗到再次治疗或复发的间隔时间较长、手术干预风险降低和更好的屈光结果相关。IVI 和 LPC 之间的所有其他结果都相似。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验