RESUMEN
Background: The inflammation plays a role in the pathophysiology of type-2 diabetes progression, and the mechanism remains unclear. The systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) is a novel inflammatory marker for type 2 diabetes patients and integrates multiple indicators in complete blood counts and routine blood tests. Aim: Since there is no international diagnostic standard for dry eye disease (DED), this study uses low-cost inflammatory blood biomarkers to investigate the correlation between SII and DM2-DED and determine the diagnosis indices of other biomarkers in DM2-DED. Methodology: A case-control retrospective analysis of totel patients n = 293 randomly selected and categorized into four groups: DED, DM2, DM2-DED, and healthy subjects. Demographic and blood biomarker variables were classified as categorical and continuous variables. The platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), lymphocytes-to-lymphocyte ratio, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and SII were calculated platelet count multiply by NLR and analyzed for their correlation for all groups. Results: Focusing on DM2-DED patients was more common in females, 59.6%, than in males, 40.2%. The mean ages were 60.7 ± 11.85 years, a statistically significant difference with all groups. In the study group DM2-DED, there was an increase in all blood markers compared to all remaining groups except PLR. Only neutrophil, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and fasting blood sugar levels were statistically significant differences in DM2-DED patients (p > 0.001, p < 0.001, and p < 0.001, respectively) compared to all groups. There was a positive correlation between HbA1c and PLR, HbA1c and NLR, and HbA1c and SII (r = 0.037, p = 0.705; r = 0.031, p = 0.754; and r = 0.066, p < 0.501, respectively) in the DM2-DED group. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that elevated SII values were linked to elevated HbA1c in DM2-DED patients. The potential of SII and HbA1c as early diagnostic indicators for ocular problems associated with diabetes mellitus is highlighted by their favorable connection in diagnosing DM2-DED.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: The traditional standard of care for Graves' ophthalmopathy (GO) is glucocorticoid therapy, which is associated with many long-term side effects. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the traditional therapy to novel monoclonal antibodies (e.g. rituximab [RTX], teprotumumab, and tocilizumab [TCZ]). METHODS: We searched the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared different monoclonal antibodies (e.g. RTX, teprotumumab, and TCZ) with glucocorticoids or placebo in patients with GO. We evaluated the clinical activity score (CAS), proptosis, subjective diplopia using the Gorman score, quality of life (QoT), adverse events, change in lid fissure, NOSPECS score, and TSH receptor antibody (TRAb) levels. The odds ratio (OR) was used to represent dichotomous outcomes. The continuous outcomes were represented as standardized mean difference (SMD). Data were pooled using the inverse variance weighting method. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. RESULTS: Six (n = 571) RCTs were deemed eligible. The different monoclonal antibodies were significantly more efficacious than glucocorticoid/placebo in terms of reduction in CAS (SMD = -1.44, 95% confidence interval (CI): -1.91--0.97, P < 0.00001, I2 = 74%), change in proptosis (SMD = -4.96, 95% CI: -8.02--1.89, P = 0.002, I2 = 99%), QoL (SMD = 2.64, 95% CI: 0.50-4.79, P = 0.02, I2 = 97%), and Gorman score for diplopia (OR = 3.42, 95% CI: 1.62-7.22, P = 0.001, I2 = 8%). However, monoclonal antibodies have shown higher rates of adverse events (OR = 2.91, 95% CI: 1.12-7.56, P = 0.03, I2 = 62%). No significant difference was found with respect to lid fissure, NOSPECS, and TRAb levels. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrated that monoclonal antibodies were associated with more favorable clinical outcomes than standard steroid therapy or placebo, especially with regard to CAS, change in proptosis, diplopia, and QoL, with teprotumumab being superior. In addition, only minor safety concerns were identified with monoclonal antibodies though less worrisome than using traditional steroids.
RESUMEN
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study serves as a tool for optometrists and ophthalmologists to reinforce adherence to several preventive factors, which may decrease the incidence of myopia, and avoidance of risk factors by multiple means including education during hospital visits. It also provides insight into who should be screened and tailored screening programs for children. BACKGROUND: While studies assessing the prevalence of myopia in Saudi Arabia have contradicting results, only a few studies have evaluated the risk factors of myopia and the effect of using electronic devices on its occurrence. Thus, this study aimed to determine the prevalence of myopia and associated risk factors, among children attending an ophthalmology clinic in King Abdulaziz Medical City, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted. A total of 182 patients aged < 14 years were selected using convenient sampling. Direct assessment of the refraction was performed in the clinic, and a questionnaire was completed by the child's parent. RESULTS: Of 182 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 40.7% had myopia. Myopia was more common in boys (56.8%) than in girls (43.2%), with a median age of 8.7 years. Using multivariate regression analysis, only age (eight years and above) (OR=2.15, CI=1.12-4.12, P= 0.03), and family history of myopia (OR= 5.83, CI= 2.82-12.05, P= 0.001) were significant predictors of myopia in children. Other variables (e.g., sex, and use of laptops, computers, smartphones/tablets, or TV) were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: This study did not show a statistically significant association between using electronic devices and the onset and progression of myopia among children. Studies with a larger sample size are required to further investigate this association and assess other potential risk factors.
RESUMEN
Background: Laser photocoagulation and/or intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections constitute the current standard treatment for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of anti-VEGF monotherapy for ROP treatment using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Methods: We searched the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared intravitreal anti-VEGF monotherapy (e.g., bevacizumab, ranibizumab, aflibercept, and pegaptanib) with laser photocoagulation in preterm infants with ROP. We evaluated the rates of recurrence, treatment switching, retreatment, adverse events, and mortality. The risk ratio (RR) was used to represent dichotomous outcomes. Data were pooled using the inverse variance weighting method. The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Risk of bias was assessed using the Revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials. Results: Seven RCTs (n = 579; 1,158 eyes) were deemed eligible. Three RCTs had an overall low risk of bias, three had some concerns, and one had an overall high risk of bias. The pooled effect estimate showed a statistically significant reduction in adverse events in favor of anti-VEGF monotherapy [RR = 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07-0.44]. The pooled analysis showed no significant difference between the anti-VEGF and laser groups in terms of recurrence rate (RR = 1.56, 95% CI 0.23-10.54), treatment switching (RR = 2.92, 95% CI 0.40-21.05), retreatment (RR = 1.56, 95% CI 0.35-6.96), and mortality rate (RR = 1.28, 95% CI 0.48-3.41). Conclusion: Overall, intravitreal anti-VEGF monotherapy was associated with fewer adverse events than laser therapy, rated as high quality of evidence according to the GRADE criteria. Pooled analysis revealed no significant difference between the two arms with respect to the recurrence rate, treatment switching, retreatment, and mortality rate, with quality of evidence ranging from moderate to very low as per the GRADE approach. Systematic Review Registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails], identifier [CRD42021270077].