Suppr超能文献

抗血管内皮生长因子药物治疗中心性浆液性脉络膜视网膜病变的治疗和延长与交替剂量策略:2346 只眼的系统评价和荟萃分析。

Treat-and-extend versus alternate dosing strategies with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents to treat center involving diabetic macular edema: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 2,346 eyes.

机构信息

Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

McMaster University, Department of Surgery, Division of Ophthalmology, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

Surv Ophthalmol. 2022 Sep-Oct;67(5):1346-1363. doi: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2022.04.003. Epub 2022 Apr 25.

Abstract

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (Anti-VEGF) agents are the standard of care for diabetic macular edema (CI-DME) with vision loss. They are commonly administered using several treatment protocols, including fixed, pro re nata (PRN) and treat-and-extend (T&E) regimens. Because of the lack of evidence defining an ideal treatment paradigm, we systematically compared T&E with fixed or PRN regimens. Visual acuity improvement was similar when comparing T&E to fixed or PRN dosing at 12 and 24 months. Regarding anatomic outcomes, no significant difference was found between T&E and fixed regimens for central retinal thickness or central subfoveal thickness at 12 and 24 months. Similarly, no significant difference was found for central retinal thickness at 12 months for T&E versus PRN regimen. Regarding total number of injections, no significant difference existed between T&E versus fixed regimens at 12 months. PRN regimens delivered fewer injections compared to T&E regimens at 12 months. The results of this analysis support that visual acuity and anatomic outcomes at 12 and 24 months are similar between T&E with either fixed or PRN regimens. More head-to-head trials comparing T&E versus fixed and PRN dosing are needed to provide visual and functional outcome data beyond year 2. PROSPERO Registration: CRD42021249362.

摘要

抗血管内皮生长因子(Anti-VEGF)药物是治疗伴有视力丧失的糖尿病黄斑水肿(CI-DME)的标准治疗方法。它们通常通过几种治疗方案进行给药,包括固定剂量、按需治疗(PRN)和治疗-扩展(T&E)方案。由于缺乏定义理想治疗模式的证据,我们系统地比较了 T&E 与固定或 PRN 方案。在 12 个月和 24 个月时,比较 T&E 与固定或 PRN 剂量,视力改善情况相似。在 12 个月和 24 个月时,比较 T&E 与固定方案,在视网膜中心厚度或中心下黄斑厚度方面,解剖学结果没有显著差异。同样,在 12 个月时,T&E 与 PRN 方案相比,在视网膜中心厚度方面也没有显著差异。关于总注射次数,在 12 个月时,T&E 与固定方案之间没有显著差异。与 T&E 方案相比,PRN 方案在 12 个月时注射次数更少。这项分析的结果支持在 12 个月和 24 个月时,T&E 与固定或 PRN 方案的视力和解剖学结果相似。需要更多的头对头试验来比较 T&E 与固定和 PRN 剂量,以提供超过 2 年的视觉和功能结果数据。PROSPERO 注册号:CRD42021249362。

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