The effectiveness of pharmacological agents for the treatment of uveitic macular oedema (UMO): a systematic review
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
Authors
Colleges, School and Institutes
Abstract
Purpose: To conduct a systematic review of effectiveness of pharmacological therapies for treatment of Uveitic Macular Edema (UMO).
Method/Design: Comparative studies of pharmacological therapies in patients with UMO were identified in Cochrane CENTRAL/MEDLINE/EMBASE/CINAHL/trials registers (February 2017). PROSPERO registration: CRD42015019170.
Results: Thirty-one studies were included. Corticosteroids were the most frequently studied (n = 20). Corticosteroids (all forms) were consistently of greater/equal efficacy to active comparators; for anti-VEGF (n = 4) improvement, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) were mostly less than local corticosteroid injection; for interferon (n = 1) improvement BCVA and CMT were greater than the comparator of methotrexate; for topical indomethacin (n = 1) improvement, BCVA and CMT were greater than placebo. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, carbonic anhydrase inhibitors, and vitamin E (n = 5) were not effective for these outcomes.
Conclusion: The review highlights areas where the evidence base is still lacking, and appropriately focused trials are needed to inform best treatment to tackle this sight-threatening condition.
Method/Design: Comparative studies of pharmacological therapies in patients with UMO were identified in Cochrane CENTRAL/MEDLINE/EMBASE/CINAHL/trials registers (February 2017). PROSPERO registration: CRD42015019170.
Results: Thirty-one studies were included. Corticosteroids were the most frequently studied (n = 20). Corticosteroids (all forms) were consistently of greater/equal efficacy to active comparators; for anti-VEGF (n = 4) improvement, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) were mostly less than local corticosteroid injection; for interferon (n = 1) improvement BCVA and CMT were greater than the comparator of methotrexate; for topical indomethacin (n = 1) improvement, BCVA and CMT were greater than placebo. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, carbonic anhydrase inhibitors, and vitamin E (n = 5) were not effective for these outcomes.
Conclusion: The review highlights areas where the evidence base is still lacking, and appropriately focused trials are needed to inform best treatment to tackle this sight-threatening condition.
Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 658-680 |
| Number of pages | 23 |
| Journal | Ocular immunology and inflammation |
| Volume | 27 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| Publication status | Published - 19 May 2019 |
Keywords
- Systematic review, macular oedema, macular edema, uveitis, management, pharmacological agents, treatment, meta-analysis, Macular edema, systematic review