The 12- and 24-Month Effects of Intravitreal Ranibizumab, Aflibercept and Bevacizumab on Intraocular Pressure: A Network Meta-Analysis

Ophthalmology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keean Nanji ◽  
Gurkaran S. Sarohia ◽  
Kevin Kennedy ◽  
Tiandra Ceyhan ◽  
Tyler McKechnie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intraocular Pressure ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Intravitreal Ranibizumab

scholarly journals Systematic review and meta-analyses of trendelenburg and prone position on intraocular pressure in adult patients undergoing surgery

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Sharon Ann Van Wicklin
Keyword(s):  
Intraocular Pressure ◽  
Prone Position ◽  
Vision Loss ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Adult Patients ◽  
Trendelenburg Position ◽  
Time Points ◽  
Comprehensive Search ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Difference Effect

Background. Patients undergoing surgery in the Trendelenburg and prone positions may be at risk for postoperative vision loss associated with increased intraocular pressure. The purpose of this dissertation research is to estimate the magnitude of the increase in intraocular pressure at specific perioperative time points in adult patients undergoing surgery in the Trendelenburg and prone positions. Methods. Comprehensive search strategies were used to identify eligible studies for two meta-analyses and to address the research questions. For each meta-analysis, standardized mean difference effect sizes were calculated for selected perioperative time points. Results. Using a random effects model, the meta-analysis examining the effect of Trendelenburg position, showed that intraocular pressure decreased significantly after induction and before arousal. Intraocular pressure increased significantly after abdominal insufflation and during Trendelenburg position. The meta-analysis examining the effect of prone position, showed that intraocular pressure increased significantly between induction of anesthesia and up to 10 minutes of prone position and continued to increase significantly until the end of the prone position. Conclusions. Intraocular pressure increases of the magnitude found in this research demonstrate the need for implementing interventions to reduce the risk for postoperative vision loss in patients undergoing surgery in the Trendelenburg and prone positions.

scholarly journals Comparison of intraocular pressure measured by ocular response analyzer and Goldmann applanation tonometer after corneal refractive surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hui Zhang ◽  
Zhengtao Sun ◽  
Lin Li ◽  
Ran Sun ◽  
Haixia Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Intraocular Pressure ◽  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Refractive Surgery ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Ocular Response Analyzer ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Goldmann Applanation Tonometer ◽  
Applanation Tonometer ◽  
Corneal Refractive Surgery

Abstract Background Accurate measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) after corneal refractive surgery is of great significance to clinic, and comparisons among various IOP measuring instruments are not rare, but there is a lack of unified analysis. Although Goldmann Applanation Tonometer (GAT) is currently the internationally recognized gold standard for IOP measurement, its results are severely affected by central corneal thickness (CCT). Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) takes certain biomechanical properties of cornea into account and is supposed to be less dependent of CCT. In this study, we conducted the meta-analysis to systematically assess the differences and similarities of IOP values measured by ORA and GAT in patients after corneal refractive surgery from the perspective of evidence-based medicine. Methods The authors searched electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of science, Cochrane library and Chinese electronic databases of CNKI and Wanfang) from Jan. 2005 to Jan. 2019, studies describing IOP comparisons measured by GAT and ORA after corneal refractive surgery were included. Quality assessment, subgroup analysis, meta-regression analysis and publication bias analysis were applied in succession. Results Among the 273 literatures initially retrieved, 8 literatures (13 groups of data) with a total of 724 eyes were included in the meta-analysis, and all of which were English literatures. In the pooled analysis, the weighted mean difference (WMD) between IOPcc and IOPGAT was 2.67 mmHg (95% CI: 2.20~3.14 mmHg, p < 0.0001), the WMD between IOPg and IOPGAT was − 0.27 mmHg (95% CI: − 0.70~0.16 mmHg, p = 0.2174). In the subgroup analysis of postoperative IOPcc and IOPGAT, the heterogeneity among the data on surgical procedure was zero, while the heterogeneity of other subgroups was still more than 50%. The comparison of the mean difference of pre- and post-operative IOP (∆IOP) was: mean-∆IOPg > mean-∆IOPGAT > mean-∆IOPcc. Conclusions IOPcc, which is less dependent on CCT, may be more close to the true IOP after corneal refractive surgery compared with IOPg and IOPGAT, and the recovery of IOPcc after corneal surface refractive surgery may be more stable than that after lamellar refractive surgery.

scholarly journals Comparing iStent versus CyPass with or without phacoemulsification in patients with glaucoma: a meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 204062231882085 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Mahdavi Fard ◽  
Sangita P. Patel ◽  
Leili Pourafkari ◽  
Nader D. Nader
Keyword(s):  
Intraocular Pressure ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Review ◽  
Cataract Extraction ◽  
Lowering Effect ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Mean Differences ◽  
Review Manager

Bacground: The aim of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis to compare the overall intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering effect of iStent or CyPass as isolated procedures or in combination with cataract extraction. Materials and methods: Cochrane review manager 5.3 software (RevMan® 5.3) was used for a meta-analysis of IOPs and the number of antiglaucoma medications in six groups according to the type and number of stents and whether the procedure was isolated or in combination with cataract extraction. Main results: A total of 33 out of 446 publications retrieved have been enrolled. The mean changes in IOP in the groups with one iStent and more than two iStents with concurrent cataract extraction were −3.78 ± 0.53 mmHg and −3.89 ± 0.73 mmHg, respectively. The mean differences in IOP in the groups with one iStent and more than two iStents without concurrent cataract extraction were −3.96 ± 0.25 mmHg and −7.48 ± 0.55 mmHg, respectively. The mean changes in IOP in the groups with CyPass implantation with and without concurrent cataract extraction were −4.97 ± 1.38 mmHg and −8.96 ± 0.16 mmHg, respectively. Conclusions: Both iStent and CyPass either in combination with cataract extraction or as isolated procedures effectively decrease IOP. This effect is greatest with isolated implantation of CyPass followed by multiple iStents and then single iStent implantation and lasts up to 2 years.

Meta-Analysis of 24-h Intraocular Pressure Fluctuation Studies and the Efficacy of Glaucoma Medicines

2010 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
William C. Stewart ◽  
Anastasios G.P. Konstas ◽  
Bonnie Kruft ◽  
Heather M. Mathis ◽  
Jeanette A. Stewart
Keyword(s):  
Intraocular Pressure ◽  
Pressure Fluctuation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Intraocular Pressure Fluctuation

scholarly journals Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implants versus Intravitreal Anti-VEGF Treatment in Treating Patients with Retinal Vein Occlusion: A Meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qian Shi ◽  
Lixiong Gao ◽  
Lijun Zhou ◽  
Chunyu Tian ◽  
Na Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intraocular Pressure ◽  
Retinal Vein Occlusion ◽  
Macular Oedema ◽  
Vision Loss ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Vein Occlusion ◽  
Anti Vegf ◽  
First Choice ◽  
Intravitreal Dexamethasone

Abstract Background: Retinal vein occlusion (RVO) is a common retinal venous disorder that causes vision loss. No specific therapy has been developed. Controversy exists regarding two treatments: intravitreal dexamethasone implants and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). The goal of this study is to compare the effectiveness and safety of dexamethasone implants and anti-VEGF treatment for RVO. Methods: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies comparing dexamethasone implants with anti-VEGF in patients with RVO. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfield thickness (CST), intraocular pressure changes, conjunctival haemorrhage, reduced VA, and macular oedema were extracted from the final included studies. RevMan 5.3 was used to conduct the quantitative analysis and bias assessment. Results: Four articles assessing 969 eyes were included. The anti-VEGF treatment showed better BCVA improvement (mean difference [MD] = -10.59, P < 0.00001) and more CST decrease (MD = -86.71 μm, P = 0.02) than the dexamethasone implants. However, the dexamethasone implants required fewer injections. As for adverse effects, the dexamethasone implants showed significantly higher intraocular pressure (IOP) and more cataracts than the anti-VEGF treatment. No significant differences were found in conjunctival haemorrhage, reduced VA, and macular oedema. Conclusions: Anti-VEGF treatment showed better functional and anatomical improvement with less risk of IOP elevation and cataract formation compared to dexamethasone implants. Thus, anti-VEGF treatment is the first choice for treating RVO patients. Keywords: dexamethasone intravitreal implant, anti-VEGF treatment, retinal vein occlusion, meta-analysis

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document