Save Sight Institute, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Sydney Eye Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
Save Sight Institute, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Sydney Eye Hospital, Sydney, Australia; Vancouver General Hospital/Eye Care Centre, Vancouver, BC.
Can J Ophthalmol. 2021 Dec;56(6):355-363. doi: 10.1016/j.jcjo.2021.01.017. Epub 2021 Feb 23.
To systematically review and perform a meta-analysis on the available evidence for anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) monotherapy versus panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR).
Systematic review and meta-analysis PARTICIPANTS: Randomized clinical trials included participants ≥18 years old with clinical or angiographic evidence of PDR. Interventions included were anti-VEGF monotherapy and PRP. Excluded studies were those with potentially biased treatment allocation and those offering combination therapies.
The primary outcome was mean change in best-corrected visual acuity. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of patients developing severe (<6/60) or moderate (6/24-6/60) vision loss, rates of vitrectomy or vitreous hemorrhage, worsening macula edema, and reduced visual field indices.
Five studies of varying quality met the inclusion criteria (n = 632). The anti-VEGF intervention arm had a mean difference of -0.08 logMAR or 4 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (EDTRS) letters gained (p = 0.02) when compared with PRP at 12 months. The difference in rates of vitrectomy and vitreous hemorrhage favoured anti-VEGF over PRP (risk difference [RD] -0.10, p = < 0.001 and RD -0.10, p = 0.003 respectively).
This meta-analysis of the available evidence in patients with early PDR demonstrates a potential benefit for anti-VEGF over PRP alone. However, these benefits must be weighed against the relative costs of treatment and the potential risks of loss to follow-up.
系统回顾和进行荟萃分析,评估抗血管内皮生长因子(anti-VEGF)单药治疗与全视网膜光凝(PRP)治疗增生型糖尿病视网膜病变(PDR)的现有证据。
系统回顾和荟萃分析
纳入≥18 岁、有临床或血管造影证据的 PDR 患者的随机临床试验。干预措施包括 anti-VEGF 单药治疗和 PRP。排除潜在偏倚治疗分配的研究和提供联合治疗的研究。
主要结局为最佳矫正视力的平均变化。次要结局为发生严重(<6/60)或中度(6/24-6/60)视力丧失的患者比例、玻璃体切除术或玻璃体积血发生率、黄斑水肿恶化和视敏度指数降低。
符合纳入标准的五项研究质量不同(n=632)。与 PRP 相比,anti-VEGF 干预组在 12 个月时的平均差异为-0.08 logMAR 或 4 个早期糖尿病视网膜病变研究(EDTRS)字母增益(p=0.02)。玻璃体切除术和玻璃体积血的发生率差异有利于 anti-VEGF 优于 PRP(风险差异[RD]-0.10,p<0.001 和 RD-0.10,p=0.003)。
对早期 PDR 患者现有证据的荟萃分析表明,anti-VEGF 治疗优于单独 PRP。然而,这些益处必须与治疗的相对成本和潜在的随访损失风险相权衡。