Smith Justine R, Thorne Jennifer E, Flaxel Christina J, Jain Nieraj, Kim Stephen J, Maguire Maureen G, Patel Shriji, Weng Christina Y, Yeh Steven, Kim Leo A
College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia.
Department of Ophthalmology, The Wilmer Eye Institute, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Ophthalmology. 2024 Sep;131(9):1107-1120. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2024.02.019. Epub 2024 Apr 20.
To review the evidence on the effectiveness and complications of periocular and intraocular corticosteroid therapies for noninfectious uveitic macular edema.
A literature search of the PubMed database was conducted last in December 2021 and a post-assessment search was conducted in March 2023. The searches were limited to articles published in English and no date restrictions were imposed. The combined searches yielded 739 citations; 53 articles were selected for inclusion because the studies (1) evaluated periocular corticosteroid injection, intraocular corticosteroid injection or implant, suprachoroidal corticosteroid injection, or a combination thereof for uveitic macular edema; (2) had outcomes that included visual acuity (VA) or macular edema assessed clinically or imaged by OCT or fluorescein angiography; and (3) included more than 20 patients.
This assessment reviewed 23 articles that provided level I or level II evidence from 18 studies on the use of periocular, suprachoroidal, and intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injections and intravitreal dexamethasone and fluocinolone acetonide implants or inserts in noninfectious uveitic macular edema. These reports consistently demonstrated that all investigated periocular and intraocular corticosteroid therapies improved VA, macular structure, or both. One comparative study showed that intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection and the dexamethasone intravitreal implant had effectiveness superior to that of periocular triamcinolone acetonide injection for these outcomes. As a group, the studies highlighted the potential for these therapies to elevate intraocular pressure and to accelerate cataract formation.
The published literature provides high-quality evidence that periocular and intraocular corticosteroid therapies are effective and safe for the treatment of noninfectious uveitic macular edema. However, information on the relative effectiveness and complication rates across the different therapies is limited.
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
回顾眼周和眼内皮质类固醇疗法治疗非感染性葡萄膜炎性黄斑水肿的有效性和并发症的证据。
2021年12月最后一次对PubMed数据库进行文献检索,并于2023年3月进行了事后评估检索。检索仅限于以英文发表的文章,且没有日期限制。综合检索产生了739条引用;53篇文章被选入,因为这些研究(1)评估了眼周皮质类固醇注射、眼内皮质类固醇注射或植入、脉络膜上腔皮质类固醇注射或它们的组合用于葡萄膜炎性黄斑水肿;(2)其结果包括通过临床评估或经光学相干断层扫描(OCT)或荧光素血管造影成像评估的视力(VA)或黄斑水肿;(3)纳入了超过20名患者。
本评估回顾了23篇文章,这些文章提供了来自18项研究的I级或II级证据,这些研究涉及使用眼周、脉络膜上腔和玻璃体内曲安奈德注射以及玻璃体内地塞米松和氟轻松醋酸酯植入物或插入物治疗非感染性葡萄膜炎性黄斑水肿。这些报告一致表明,所有研究的眼周和眼内皮质类固醇疗法均改善了视力、黄斑结构或两者。一项比较研究表明,对于这些结果,玻璃体内曲安奈德注射和地塞米松玻璃体内植入物的有效性优于眼周曲安奈德注射。总体而言,这些研究强调了这些疗法升高眼压和加速白内障形成的可能性。
已发表的文献提供了高质量的证据,表明眼周和眼内皮质类固醇疗法治疗非感染性葡萄膜炎性黄斑水肿是有效且安全的。然而,关于不同疗法的相对有效性和并发症发生率的信息有限。
在本文末尾的脚注和披露中可能会发现专有或商业披露信息。