...
首页> 外文期刊>Indian Journal of Ophthalmology >Comparison between Ozurdex and intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment for retinal vein occlusion–related macular edema: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
【24h】

Comparison between Ozurdex and intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment for retinal vein occlusion–related macular edema: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

机译:Ozurdex与玻璃体内抗血管内皮生长因子治疗视网膜静脉阻塞相关性黄斑水肿的比较:随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析

获取原文
           

摘要

This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of intravitreal dexamethasone (DEX) implant and intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatments for macular edema (ME) secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO), central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO), and branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO). The electronic databases comprehensively searched for the studies that compared DEX with anti-VEGF treatments in patients suffering from RVO-related ME. The effectiveness was estimated using best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central retinal thickness (CRT), and intraocular pressure (IOP). All data were analyzed by Review Manager (RevMan) 5.3. According to the meta-analysis from five randomized control trials, both DEX implant and anti-VEGF agent treatments were effective, but no significant differences in BCVA and CRT were observed between these two treatments. Novartis' two studies indicated that anti-VEGF agents significantly reduced the CRT compared with DEX implant at 6 months [weighted mean difference: 158.53 μm, 95% confidence interval (CI): (71.09, 245.96), P= 0.0004]. Furthermore, anti-VEGF agents showed some advantages on cataract formation [risk ratio (RR): 3.43, 95% CI: (1.35, 8.71), P= 0.009] and other adverse events [RR: 1.19, 95% CI: (1.09, 1.31), P= 0.0002] without heterogeneity (P = 0.20, Isup2/sup = 35%). Anti-VEGF agents were also effective treatments for cataract formation or less adverse events for RVO-related ME. In contrast, DEX implant had higher risk for IOP elevation and lower cataract incidence than anti-VEGF agents. Hence, complementary and alternative treatments are expected.
机译:本系统综述旨在评估玻璃体内地塞米松(DEX)植入物和玻璃体内抗血管内皮生长因子(VEGF)治疗视网膜静脉阻塞(RVO),视网膜中央静脉阻塞(CRVO)继发的黄斑水肿(ME)的有效性和安全性),以及视网膜分支静脉阻塞(BRVO)。电子数据库全面搜索了在患有RVO相关性ME的患者中将DEX与抗VEGF治疗进行比较的研究。使用最佳矫正视力(BCVA),视网膜中央厚度(CRT)和眼内压(IOP)评估疗效。所有数据均由Review Manager(RevMan)5.3分析。根据来自五个随机对照试验的荟萃分析,DEX植入物和抗VEGF药物治疗均有效,但在这两种治疗之间BCVA和CRT均未观察到显着差异。诺华的两项研究表明,与DEX植入物相比,抗VEGF药物在6个月时显着降低了CRT [加权平均差异:158.53μm,95%置信区间(CI):( 71.09,245.96),P = 0.0004]。此外,抗VEGF药物在白内障形成方面显示出一些优势[风险比(RR):3.43,95%CI:(1.35,8.71),P = 0.009]和其他不良事件[RR:1.19,95%CI:(1.09) ,1.31),P = 0.0002],没有异质性(P = 0.20,I 2 = 35%)。抗VEGF药物也是有效的治疗白内障或对RVO相关ME不良反应较少的药物。相反,与抗VEGF药物相比,DEX植入物有更高的IOP升高风险和更低的白内障发生率。因此,期望补充和替代治疗。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号