1.
Comparison of Standard Versus Accelerated Corneal Collagen Cross-Linking for Keratoconus: A Meta-Analysis.
Wen, D, Li, Q, Song, B, Tu, R, Wang, Q, O'Brart, DPS, McAlinden, C, Huang, J
Investigative ophthalmology & visual science. 2018;(10):3920-3931
Abstract
PURPOSE To systematically compare epithelial-off standard (SCXL) to accelerated corneal collagen cross-linking (ACXL) for the treatment of keratoconus. METHODS PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the US trial registry were searched for trials comparing SCXL and ACXL for keratoconus up to October 2017. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Primary outcomes were changes in uncorrected distance visual acuity, maximum keratometry (Kmax), and mean keratometry (mean K). Secondary outcomes were changes in corrected distance visual acuity, mean refractive spherical equivalent, central corneal thickness (CCT), and endothelial cell density (ECD). RESULTS Eleven trials were included. For primary outcomes, SCXL showed a greater reduction in Kmax (SMD 0.32; 95% CI 0.16, 0.48) than ACXL. For secondary outcomes, the decrease in CCT (SMD 0.32; 95% CI 0.03, 0.61) and ECD (SMD 0.26; 95% CI 0.06, 0.46) was less with ACXL than with SCXL. For the other outcomes, there were no statistically significant differences. CONCLUSIONS SCXL has a greater effect in terms of reduction in Kmax than ACXL, while ACXL induces less reduction in CCT and ECD than SCXL. Further well-designed randomized controlled trials comparing ACXL and SCXL are indicated.
2.
Efficacy of Corneal Collagen Cross-Linking for the Treatment of Keratoconus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Meiri, Z, Keren, S, Rosenblatt, A, Sarig, T, Shenhav, L, Varssano, D
Cornea. 2016;(3):417-28
Abstract
PURPOSE To examine the efficacy of corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL) for the treatment of keratoconus (KCN). METHODS A systemic literature review and meta-analysis of ocular functional and structural parameters of patients with KCN undergoing cross-linking procedures were performed using PubMed and the web of science. A literature search was performed for relevant peer-reviewed publications on population-based studies. Data were analyzed with R software (Meta library), and heterogeneity was assessed with the Cochran Q and I. A random-effects model was used for high heterogeneity; otherwise a fixed model was used. Sensitivity analysis of particular tested groups was used to explain high heterogeneity. The main outcome measures extracted from the articles were corrected distance visual acuity, uncorrected distance visual acuity, and maximum K. RESULTS An improvement in visual acuity of 1 to 2 Snellen lines was found 3 months or more after undergoing CXL. Changes were more pronounced in uncorrected visual acuity. Some topography parameters were found to be improved (0.6-1 diopters) 12 to 24 months after CXL. The refractive cylinder improved by 0.4 to 0.7 diopters. Endothelial cell density decreased by 225 cells per square millimeter in the first 3 months and thereafter returned to normal. Corneal thickness was reduced by 10 to 20 μm in the year following CXL but not after 24 months. No changes in intraocular pressure were noted. CONCLUSIONS CXL is a safe and effective method for halting the deterioration of KCN, while slightly improving visual function.
3.
Topical treatments for cutaneous warts.
Kwok, CS, Gibbs, S, Bennett, C, Holland, R, Abbott, R
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2012;(9):CD001781
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Viral warts are a common skin condition, which can range in severity from a minor nuisance that resolve spontaneously to a troublesome, chronic condition. Many different topical treatments are available. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the efficacy of local treatments for cutaneous non-genital warts in healthy, immunocompetent adults and children. SEARCH METHODS We updated our searches of the following databases to May 2011: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (from 2005), EMBASE (from 2010), AMED (from 1985), LILACS (from 1982), and CINAHL (from 1981). We searched reference lists of articles and online trials registries for ongoing trials. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of topical treatments for cutaneous non-genital warts. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently selected trials and extracted data; a third author resolved any disagreements. MAIN RESULTS We included 85 trials involving a total of 8815 randomised participants (26 new studies were included in this update). There was a wide range of different treatments and a variety of trial designs. Many of the studies were judged to be at high risk of bias in one or more areas of trial design.Trials of salicylic acid (SA) versus placebo showed that the former significantly increased the chance of clearance of warts at all sites (RR (risk ratio) 1.56, 95% CI (confidence interval) 1.20 to 2.03). Subgroup analysis for different sites, hands (RR 2.67, 95% CI 1.43 to 5.01) and feet (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.55), suggested it might be more effective for hands than feet.A meta-analysis of cryotherapy versus placebo for warts at all sites favoured neither intervention nor control (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.65 to 3.23). Subgroup analysis for different sites, hands (RR 2.63, 95% CI 0.43 to 15.94) and feet (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.26 to 3.07), again suggested better outcomes for hands than feet. One trial showed cryotherapy to be better than both placebo and SA, but only for hand warts.There was no significant difference in cure rates between cryotherapy at 2-, 3-, and 4-weekly intervals.Aggressive cryotherapy appeared more effective than gentle cryotherapy (RR 1.90, 95% CI 1.15 to 3.15), but with increased adverse effects.Meta-analysis did not demonstrate a significant difference in effectiveness between cryotherapy and SA at all sites (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.71) or in subgroup analyses for hands and feet.Two trials with 328 participants showed that SA and cryotherapy combined appeared more effective than SA alone (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.43).The benefit of intralesional bleomycin remains uncertain as the evidence was inconsistent. The most informative trial with 31 participants showed no significant difference in cure rate between bleomycin and saline injections (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.78).Dinitrochlorobenzene was more than twice as effective as placebo in 2 trials with 80 participants (RR 2.12, 95% CI 1.38 to 3.26).Two trials of clear duct tape with 193 participants demonstrated no advantage over placebo (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.51 to 4.05).We could not combine data from trials of the following treatments: intralesional 5-fluorouracil, topical zinc, silver nitrate (which demonstrated possible beneficial effects), topical 5-fluorouracil, pulsed dye laser, photodynamic therapy, 80% phenol, 5% imiquimod cream, intralesional antigen, and topical alpha-lactalbumin-oleic acid (which showed no advantage over placebo).We did not identify any RCTs that evaluated surgery (curettage, excision), formaldehyde, podophyllotoxin, cantharidin, diphencyprone, or squaric acid dibutylester. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Data from two new trials comparing SA and cryotherapy have allowed a better appraisal of their effectiveness. The evidence remains more consistent for SA, but only shows a modest therapeutic effect. Overall, trials comparing cryotherapy with placebo showed no significant difference in effectiveness, but the same was also true for trials comparing cryotherapy with SA. Only one trial showed cryotherapy to be better than both SA and placebo, and this was only for hand warts. Adverse effects, such as pain, blistering, and scarring, were not consistently reported but are probably more common with cryotherapy.None of the other reviewed treatments appeared safer or more effective than SA and cryotherapy. Two trials of clear duct tape demonstrated no advantage over placebo. Dinitrochlorobenzene (and possibly other similar contact sensitisers) may be useful for the treatment of refractory warts.