Interventions for central serous chorioretinopathy: a network meta-analysis

医学 浆液性液体 梅德林 临床试验 心理干预 荟萃分析 眼科 不利影响 随机对照试验 内科学 精神科 政治学 法学
作者
Mahsa Salehi,Adam S. Wenick,Hua Andrew Law,Jennifer Evans,Peter Gehlbach
出处
期刊:The Cochrane library [Elsevier]
卷期号:2015 (12) 被引量:95
标识
DOI:10.1002/14651858.cd011841.pub2
摘要

Background Central serous chorioretinopathy (CSC) is characterized by serous detachment of the neural retina with dysfunction of the choroid and retinal pigment epithelium (RPE). The effects on the retina are usually self limited, although some people are left with irreversible vision loss due to progressive and permanent photoreceptor damage or RPE atrophy. There have been a variety of interventions used in CSC, including, but not limited to, laser treatment, photodynamic therapy (PDT), and intravitreal injection of anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor (anti‐VEGF) agents. However, it is not known whether these or other treatments offer significant advantages over observation or other interventions. At present there is no evidence‐based consensus on the management of CSC. Due in large part to the propensity for CSC to resolve spontaneously or to follow a waxing and waning course, the most common initial approach to treatment is observation. It remains unclear whether this is the best approach with regard to safety and efficacy. Objectives To compare the relative effectiveness of interventions for central serous chorioretinopathy. Search methods We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2015, Issue 9), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In‐Process and Other Non‐Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to February 2014), EMBASE (January 1980 to October 2015), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 5 October 2015. Selection criteria Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared any intervention for CSC with any other intervention for CSC or control. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data. We pooled data from all studies using a fixed‐effect model. For interventions applied to the eye (i.e. not systemic interventions), we synthesized direct and indirect evidence in a network meta‐analysis model. Main results We included 25 studies with 1098 participants (1098 eyes) and follow‐up from 16 weeks to 12 years. Studies were conducted in Europe, North and South America, Middle East, and Asia. The trials were small (most trials enrolled fewer than 50 participants) and poorly reported; often it was unclear whether key aspects of the trial, such as allocation concealment, had been done. A substantial proportion of the trials were not masked. The studies considered a variety of treatments: anti‐VEGF (ranibizumab, bevacizumab), PDT (full‐dose, half‐dose, 30%, low‐fluence), laser treatment (argon, krypton and micropulse laser), beta‐blockers, carbonic anhydrase inhibitors, Helicobactor pylori treatment, and nutritional supplements (Icaps, lutein); there were only one or two trials contributing data for each comparison. We downgraded for risk of bias and imprecision for most analyses, reflecting study limitations and imprecise estimates. Network meta‐analysis (as planned in our protocol) did not help to resolve this uncertainty due to a lack of trials, and problems with intransitivity, particularly with respect to acute or chronic CSC. Low quality evidence from two trials suggested little difference in the effect of anti‐VEGF (ranibizumab or bevacizumab) or observation on change in visual acuity at six months in acute CSC (mean difference (MD) 0.01 LogMAR (logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution), 95% confidence interval (CI) ‐0.02 to 0.03; 64 participants). CSC had resolved in all participants by six months. There were no significant adverse effects noted. Low quality evidence from one study (58 participants) suggested that half‐dose PDT treatment of acute CSC probably results in a small improvement in vision (MD ‐0.10 logMAR, 95% CI ‐0.18 to ‐0.02), less recurrence (risk ratio (RR) 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.81) and less persistent CSC (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.02) at 12 months compared to sham treatment. There were no significant adverse events noted. Low quality evidence from two trials (56 participants) comparing anti‐VEGF to low‐fluence PDT in chronic CSC found little evidence for any difference in visual acuity at 12 months (MD 0.03 logMAR, 95% CI ‐0.08 to 0.15). There was some evidence that more people in the anti‐VEGF group had recurrent CSC compared to people treated with PDT but, due to inconsistency between trials, it was difficult to estimate an effect. More people in the anti‐VEGF group had persistent CSC at 12 months (RR 6.19, 95% CI 1.61 to 23.81; 34 participants). Two small trials of micropulse laser, one in people with acute CSC and one in people with chronic CSC, provided low quality evidence that laser treatment may lead to better visual acuity (MD ‐0.20 logMAR, 95% CI ‐0.30 to ‐0.11; 45 participants). There were no significant adverse effects noted. Other comparisons were largely inconclusive. We identified 12 ongoing trials covering the following interventions: aflibercept and eplerenone in acute CSC; spironolactone, eplerenone, lutein, PDT, and micropulse laser in chronic CSC; and micropulse laser and oral mifepristone in two trials where type of CSC not clearly specified. Authors' conclusions CSC remains an enigmatic condition in large part due to a natural history of spontaneous improvement in a high proportion of people and also because no single treatment has provided overwhelming evidence of efficacy in published RCTs. While a number of interventions have been proposed as potentially efficacious, the quality of study design, execution of the study and the relatively small number of participants enrolled and followed to revealing endpoints limits the utility of existing data. It is not clear whether there is a clinically important benefit to treating acute CSC which often resolves spontaneously as part of its natural history. RCTs comparing individual treatments to the natural history would be valuable in identifying potential treatment groups for head‐to‐head comparison. Of the interventions studied to date, PDT or micropulse laser treatment appear the most promising for study in future trials.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
更新
PDF的下载单位、IP信息已删除 (2025-6-4)

科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
刚刚
cbz发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
1秒前
11发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
微笑采文完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
尉迟晓凡发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
王乐安完成签到,获得积分10
6秒前
zhuh发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
singty发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
7秒前
7秒前
8秒前
Yucorn完成签到 ,获得积分10
9秒前
10秒前
11秒前
12秒前
毛彬发布了新的文献求助10
12秒前
无花果应助陈槊诸采纳,获得10
13秒前
13秒前
脑洞疼应助fuyaoye2010采纳,获得10
14秒前
英吹斯挺完成签到,获得积分10
14秒前
22222发布了新的文献求助10
16秒前
111发布了新的文献求助10
16秒前
17秒前
李存发布了新的文献求助10
17秒前
55完成签到,获得积分10
19秒前
19秒前
乐乐应助鞑靼采纳,获得10
21秒前
浮游应助尉迟晓凡采纳,获得10
22秒前
zyq发布了新的文献求助10
23秒前
lineeeee发布了新的文献求助10
24秒前
Jasper应助陈槊诸采纳,获得10
24秒前
赫若魔应助生而狂野天逸采纳,获得10
27秒前
edtaa发布了新的文献求助10
28秒前
31秒前
科研通AI5应助陈槊诸采纳,获得10
36秒前
彭于晏应助edtaa采纳,获得10
36秒前
Akim应助王小丹采纳,获得10
40秒前
lwl666应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
44秒前
小蘑菇应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
44秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
An overview of orchard cover crop management 1000
Rapid Review of Electrodiagnostic and Neuromuscular Medicine: A Must-Have Reference for Neurologists and Physiatrists 1000
二维材料在应力作用下的力学行为和层间耦合特性研究 600
基于3um sOl硅光平台的集成发射芯片关键器件研究 500
A review of Order Plesiosauria, and the description of a new, opalised pliosauroid, Leptocleidus demoscyllus, from the early cretaceous of Coober Pedy, South Australia 400
National standards & grade-level outcomes for K-12 physical education 400
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 医学 生物 材料科学 工程类 有机化学 内科学 生物化学 物理 计算机科学 纳米技术 遗传学 基因 复合材料 化学工程 物理化学 病理 催化作用 免疫学 量子力学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 4810643
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 4124069
关于积分的说明 12760674
捐赠科研通 3860293
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2125015
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1146673
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1040053