...
首页> 外文期刊>Current Eye Research >Intravitreal ranibizumab (Lucentis) for the treatment of diabetic macular edema: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical control trials
【24h】

Intravitreal ranibizumab (Lucentis) for the treatment of diabetic macular edema: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical control trials

机译:玻璃体腔注射兰尼单抗(Lucentis)治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿:随机临床对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose: To evaluate the therapeutic effect and safety of intravitreal ranibizumab (RBZ) or RBZ combined with focal/grid laser in diabetic macular edema (DME). Design: Systematic review of randomized clinical control trials (RCCTs) comparing RBZ or RBZ combined with focal/grid laser to non-drug control or focal/grid laser in DME was performed. Methods: The RCCTs in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PUBMED, EMBASE, the metaRegister of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were included. The means and standard deviations of change from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) were extracted at 12 or 24 months. Data regarding complications were collected. The Review Manager 5.1.2 was used. Results: Four trials with a total of 1313 DME patients were included. Our analysis showed that intravitreal RBZ appeared to be superior to non-drug therapy in reducing CMT (12 months, p = 0.02), and improving BCVA with statistical significance (12 months, p = 0.0003). RBZ combined with focal/grid laser experienced statistically significant reduction in CMT (12 months, p = 0.01), and improvement in BCVA (12 months, p < 0.00001; 24 months, p = 0.007) compared with focal/grid laser. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) had no statistical difference between RBZ monotherapy or RBZ combined with laser and the noninvasive interventions. The improvement in BCVA and CMT from the RBZ and RBZ plus laser arms both had no statistically significant difference. While the mean number of intravitreal injections needed was lower in RBZ plus laser arm than RBZ arm at the end of 24 months. Conclusions: Our analysis shows that RBZ and RBZ combined with focal/grid laser is more advantageous than non-drug treatment or focal/grid laser in reducing CMT and improving BCVA in DME during 12 and 24 months follow-up period and can be well tolerated based on the safety assessment. Intravitreal RBZ may be equivalent to RBZ combined with focal/grid laser.
机译:目的:评估玻璃体内兰尼单抗(RBZ)或RBZ联合聚焦/栅格激光治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿(DME)的疗效和安全性。设计:对RBZ或RBZ结合聚焦/栅格激光与DME中的非药物对照或聚焦/栅格激光进行了随机临床对照试验(RCCT)的系统评价。方法:纳入了Cochrane对照试验中心注册簿,PUBMED,EMBASE,对照试验的metaRegister和ClinicalTrials.gov中的RCCT。在第12或24个月时提取最佳矫正视敏度(BCVA)和中央黄斑厚度(CMT)与基线相比的均值和标准差。收集有关并发症的数据。使用了Review Manager 5.1.2。结果:包括总共1313名DME患者的四项试验。我们的分析表明,玻璃体内RBZ在降低CMT(12个月,P = 0.02)和改善BCVA方面具有优于统计学的意义(12个月,P = 0.0003),优于非药物疗法。与聚焦/栅格激光器相比,RBZ结合聚焦/栅格激光器经历了CMT的统计学显着降低(12个月,P = 0.01),并且BCVA有所改善(12个月,P <0.00001; 24个月,P = 0.007)。 RBZ单药治疗或RBZ联合激光治疗和无创干预之间的不良事件发生率无统计学差异。 RBZ和RBZ加激光臂对BCVA和CMT的改善均无统计学差异。在24个月末,RBZ加激光臂的平均玻璃体内注射次数低于RBZ臂。结论:我们的分析表明,RBZ和RBZ结合聚焦/栅格激光比非药物治疗或聚焦/栅格激光在12和24个月的随访期间降低DMT中的CMT和改善BCVA更具优势,并且可以很好地耐受基于安全评估。玻璃体内RBZ可能等同于结合聚焦/栅格激光的RBZ。

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