• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

不同抗 VEGF 药物联合不同给药方式治疗新生血管性青光眼的疗效与安全性比较:系统评价和贝叶斯网状Meta 分析。

Comparative efficacy and safety of different anti-VEGF agents combined with different delivery methods for neovascular glaucoma: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

机构信息

Shaanxi Eye Hospital, Xi'an People's Hospital (Xi'an Fourth Hospital), Affiliated People's Hospital of Northwest University, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.

Shaanxi Eye Hospital, Xi'an People's Hospital (Xi'an Fourth Hospital), Affiliated People's Hospital of Northwest University, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2024 Mar 4;14(3):e080103. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080103.

DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080103
PMID:38443085
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11146364/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of different anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents combined with different delivery methods for neovascular glaucoma (NVG).

DESIGN

Systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA).

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN and Chinese databases including the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Science Periodical Database (Wanfang Database), VIP Journal Integration Platform and China Biology Medicine Database were searched from inception to 5 September 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the treatment of NVG using different anti-VEGF agents combined with various methods of drug administration, without any language limitations. All patients included underwent panretinal laser photocoagulation and there were no restrictions on prior glaucoma surgery.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Random-effect Bayesian NMA was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety and rank priority of anti-VEGF regimens. The source of heterogeneity and the related factors affecting the stability of the results were also explored. CINeMA (Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis) was used to assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Our analysis included 17 RCTs involving a total of 1311 eyes from 1228 patients. We examined five different treatment regimens, which used three different anti-VEGF drugs. The following treatments showed a significant decrease in intraocular pressure (IOP) compared with the control group at 1 month after glaucoma surgery: simultaneous intravitreal and intracameral injection of conbercept (ICCIVC) (mean difference (MD)=-11.56, 95% credible interval (CrI) -20.8 to -2.24), intravitreal injection of conbercept (MD=-8.88, 95% CrI -13.93 to -3.78), intravitreal injection of ranibizumab (MD=-7.62, 95% CrI -10.91 to -4.33) and intravitreal injection of bevacizumab IVB) (MD=-5.51, 95% CrI -10.79 to -0.35). The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) analysis indicated that ICCIVC (82.0%) may be the most effective regimen in reducing IOP. In terms of safety, there were no statistically significant differences among the interventions. According to the SUCRA analysis, ICCIVC (68.0%) was considered the safest choice with the fewest complications. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses showed that mean age was the main source of heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated the robustness of the study results.

CONCLUSION

ICCIVC was more effective and safer than other anti-VEGF regimens for NVG. Simultaneous intravitreal and intracameral injection was found to be the best route of administration, and conbercept was found to be the superior drug selection when compared with ranibizumab and bevacizumab.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022309676.

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2f5e/11146364/12be4a42a628/bmjopen-2023-080103f05.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2f5e/11146364/1ea81076b348/bmjopen-2023-080103f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2f5e/11146364/7ab5202dd90a/bmjopen-2023-080103f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2f5e/11146364/81ff162d01c0/bmjopen-2023-080103f03.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2f5e/11146364/7d4cb167e8ca/bmjopen-2023-080103f04.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2f5e/11146364/12be4a42a628/bmjopen-2023-080103f05.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2f5e/11146364/1ea81076b348/bmjopen-2023-080103f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2f5e/11146364/7ab5202dd90a/bmjopen-2023-080103f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2f5e/11146364/81ff162d01c0/bmjopen-2023-080103f03.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2f5e/11146364/7d4cb167e8ca/bmjopen-2023-080103f04.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2f5e/11146364/12be4a42a628/bmjopen-2023-080103f05.jpg
摘要

目的

比较不同抗血管内皮生长因子(VEGF)药物联合不同给药方式治疗新生血管性青光眼(NVG)的疗效和安全性。

设计

系统评价和贝叶斯网络荟萃分析(NMA)。

数据来源

PubMed、Embase、Cochrane 图书馆、Web of Science、ClinicalTrials.gov、ISRCTN 和中国数据库,包括中国国家知识基础设施、中国科学期刊数据库(万方数据库)、VIP 期刊整合平台和中国生物医学数据库,检索时间截至 2022 年 9 月 5 日。

入选标准

我们纳入了使用不同抗 VEGF 药物联合不同给药方法治疗 NVG 的随机对照试验(RCT),无任何语言限制。所有纳入的患者均接受了全视网膜激光光凝,且不受先前青光眼手术的限制。

数据提取和合成

两名独立的审查员提取数据并评估偏倚风险。采用随机效应贝叶斯 NMA 比较抗 VEGF 方案的疗效和安全性,并对治疗方案进行优先排序。还探索了异质性的来源以及影响结果稳定性的相关因素。CINeMA(网状 Meta 分析的可信度)用于评估证据的确定性。

结果

我们的分析纳入了 17 项 RCT,共涉及 1228 例患者的 1311 只眼。我们研究了 5 种不同的治疗方案,这些方案使用了 3 种不同的抗 VEGF 药物。与对照组相比,以下治疗方案在青光眼手术后 1 个月时眼压(IOP)显著降低:康柏西普玻璃体内和前房内联合注射(ICCIVC)(均数差值(MD)=-11.56,95%可信区间(CrI)-20.8 至-2.24)、康柏西普玻璃体内注射(MD=-8.88,95% CrI -13.93 至-3.78)、雷珠单抗玻璃体内注射(MD=-7.62,95% CrI -10.91 至-4.33)和贝伐单抗玻璃体内注射(IVB)(MD=-5.51,95% CrI -10.79 至-0.35)。累积排序概率曲线下面积(SUCRA)分析表明,ICCIVC(82.0%)可能是降低 IOP 最有效的方案。在安全性方面,干预措施之间没有统计学上的显著差异。根据 SUCRA 分析,ICCIVC(68.0%)被认为是并发症最少的最安全选择。亚组和回归分析表明,平均年龄是异质性的主要来源。敏感性分析表明研究结果稳健。

结论

与其他抗 VEGF 方案相比,ICCIVC 治疗 NVG 更有效且更安全。玻璃体内和前房内联合注射被发现是最佳的给药途径,与雷珠单抗和贝伐单抗相比,康柏西普是更优的药物选择。

PROSPERO 注册号:CRD42022309676。

相似文献

1
Comparative efficacy and safety of different anti-VEGF agents combined with different delivery methods for neovascular glaucoma: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.不同抗 VEGF 药物联合不同给药方式治疗新生血管性青光眼的疗效与安全性比较:系统评价和贝叶斯网状Meta 分析。
BMJ Open. 2024 Mar 4;14(3):e080103. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080103.
2
Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor combined with intravitreal steroids for diabetic macular oedema.抗血管内皮生长因子联合玻璃体内注射类固醇治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Apr 18;4(4):CD011599. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011599.pub2.
3
Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for diabetic macular oedema: a network meta-analysis.抗血管内皮生长因子治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿:一项网状Meta分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Jun 27;2023(6):CD007419. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007419.pub7.
4
Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for diabetic macular oedema: a network meta-analysis.抗血管内皮生长因子治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿:一项网状Meta分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jun 22;6(6):CD007419. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007419.pub5.
5
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.系统性药理学治疗慢性斑块状银屑病:网络荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Apr 19;4(4):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub4.
6
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.慢性斑块状银屑病的全身药理学治疗:一项网状荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Dec 22;12(12):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub2.
7
Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: a network meta-analysis.成人全身麻醉后预防术后恶心呕吐的药物:网状Meta分析
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Oct 19;10(10):CD012859. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012859.pub2.
8
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.系统性药理学治疗慢性斑块型银屑病:网络荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 May 23;5(5):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub5.
9
Interventions for central serous chorioretinopathy: a network meta-analysis.中心性浆液性脉络膜视网膜病变的干预措施:一项网状Meta分析
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025 Jun 16;6(6):CD011841. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011841.pub3.
10
Pharmacological interventions for the prevention of bleeding in people undergoing elective hip or knee surgery: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.择期髋关节或膝关节手术患者预防出血的药物干预措施:系统评价和网络荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Jan 16;1(1):CD013295. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013295.pub2.

引用本文的文献

1
From tumor microenvironment to ocular hypertension: unraveling the pathogenesis and therapeutic strategies of cancer-related glaucoma.从肿瘤微环境到高眼压症:解析癌症相关性青光眼的发病机制与治疗策略
Front Med (Lausanne). 2025 Aug 14;12:1628325. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1628325. eCollection 2025.
2
Intravitreal drug injection for glaucoma: mechanisms, clinical efficacy, and future horizons.玻璃体内药物注射治疗青光眼:作用机制、临床疗效及未来展望。
Front Pharmacol. 2025 Aug 13;16:1660401. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2025.1660401. eCollection 2025.
3
A Case Report of Intravitreal Aflibercept for Iris Metastasis from Small Cell Lung Carcinoma with Neovascular Glaucoma.

本文引用的文献

1
A Review of Neovascular Glaucoma: Etiology, Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Treatment.新生血管性青光眼:病因、发病机制、诊断与治疗的综述。
Medicina (Kaunas). 2022 Dec 18;58(12):1870. doi: 10.3390/medicina58121870.
2
A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials in the management of neovascular glaucoma: absence of consensus and variability in practice.一项针对新生血管性青光眼治疗的随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析:缺乏共识和实践中的变异性。
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2023 Feb;261(2):477-501. doi: 10.1007/s00417-022-05785-5. Epub 2022 Aug 8.
3
Comparisons of the short-term effectiveness and safety of surgical treatment for neovascular glaucoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
玻璃体内注射阿柏西普治疗小细胞肺癌虹膜转移伴新生血管性青光眼1例报告
Case Rep Ophthalmol. 2025 Feb 13;16(1):215-220. doi: 10.1159/000544159. eCollection 2025 Jan-Dec.
4
Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) and Its Role in the Cardiovascular System.血管内皮生长因子(VEGF)及其在心血管系统中的作用。
Biomedicines. 2024 May 10;12(5):1055. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines12051055.
手术治疗新生血管性青光眼的短期疗效和安全性比较:系统评价和网络荟萃分析。
BMJ Open. 2022 May 24;12(5):e051794. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051794.
4
The Optimization of an Anti-VEGF Therapeutic Regimen for Neovascular Glaucoma.新生血管性青光眼抗VEGF治疗方案的优化
Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 Jan 10;8:766032. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2021.766032. eCollection 2021.
5
European Glaucoma Society Terminology and Guidelines for Glaucoma, 5th Edition.欧洲青光眼学会青光眼术语和指南,第 5 版。
Br J Ophthalmol. 2021 Jun;105(Suppl 1):1-169. doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2021-egsguidelines.
6
Effect of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor on the surgical outcome of neovascular glaucoma: An overview and meta-analysis.抗血管内皮生长因子治疗新生血管性青光眼手术效果的系统评价和 Meta 分析。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2021 Oct 1;100(39):e27326. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000027326.
7
Comparison of conbercept and ranibizumab combined mitomycin C-augmented trabeculectomy for neovascular glaucoma.康柏西普与雷珠单抗联合丝裂霉素 C 增强小梁切除术治疗新生血管性青光眼的比较。
Int Ophthalmol. 2021 Aug;41(8):2869-2877. doi: 10.1007/s10792-021-01846-6. Epub 2021 Apr 24.
8
Intracameral anti-VEGF injection for advanced neovascular glaucoma after vitrectomy with silicone oil tamponade.玻璃体切除联合硅油填充术后前房内注射抗血管内皮生长因子治疗晚期新生血管性青光眼
Int J Ophthalmol. 2021 Mar 18;14(3):456-460. doi: 10.18240/ijo.2021.03.20. eCollection 2021.
9
Neovascular glaucoma.新生血管性青光眼
Dis Mon. 2021 May;67(5):101137. doi: 10.1016/j.disamonth.2021.101137. Epub 2021 Jan 27.
10
Efficacy and Safety of Intravitreal Aflibercept Injection in Japanese Patients with Neovascular Glaucoma: Outcomes from the VENERA Study.玻璃体腔内注射阿柏西普治疗日本新生血管性青光眼患者的疗效和安全性:VENERA 研究结果。
Adv Ther. 2021 Feb;38(2):1106-1115. doi: 10.1007/s12325-020-01580-y. Epub 2020 Dec 16.