Effects of Internal Limiting Membrane Peel for Idiopathic Epiretinal Membrane Surgery: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare functional and anatomical outcomes after epiretinal membrane (ERM) peeling with internal limiting membrane (ERM/ILM) peeling and without for the treatment of idiopathic ERM. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: A comprehensive search of Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, and Embase Ovid for randomized controlled trials comparing ERM/ILM with ERM was performed. Two independent reviewers selected papers and extracted data. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias (RobVis) tool. Data was analyzed using RevMan 5.3. Quality of body of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: Seven studies reporting 387 eyes overall were included. A total of 207 eyes (53%) received ERM/ILM. A total of 180 (47%) received ERM. Post-operative visual acuities (logMAR) were not significantly different between ERM/ILM and ERM, with a mean difference (MD) of 0.02 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.04 to 0.09; P = .45; I2= 42%; n = 101) at 1 month; 0.03 (95% CI: -0.01 to 0.06; P = .11, I2 = 15%; n = 299; High Certainty of Evidence) at 3 months; 0.01 (95% CI: -0.03 to 0.04; P = .72; I2 = 21%; n = 317; High Certainty of Evidence) at 6 months; and 0.01 (95% CI: -0.02 to 0.04; P = .49; I2 = 39%; n = 234) at 12 months post-operatively. ERM/ILM was significantly associated with lower ERM recurrence at 6-12 months with a relative risk of 0.16 (95% CI: 0.04-0.64; P = .01; I2 = 0%; n = 155; Moderate certainty of evidence) and an increased central macular thickness (micrometers) at 12 months with an MD of 20.53 (95% CI: 4.96-36.09; P = .01; I2 = 12%; n = 234). CONCLUSIONS: ERM/ILM and ERM result in similar visual acuity despite subtle differences in anatomical outcomes (central macular thickness). ERM/ILM is associated with a significantly lower rate of ERM recurrence at 6-12 months post-operatively and should be considered where recurrence prevention is the treatment priority.

Mucins in Intestinal Mucosal Defense and Inflammation: Learning From Clinical and Experimental Studies.

Throughout the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, a distinct mucus layer composed of highly glycosylated proteins called mucins plays an essential role in providing lubrication for the passage of food, participating in cell signaling pathways and protecting the host epithelium from commensal microorganisms and invading pathogens, as well as toxins and other environmental irritants. These mucins can be broadly classified into either secreted gel-forming mucins, those that provide the structural backbone for the mucus barrier, or transmembrane mucins, those that form the glycocalyx layer covering the underlying epithelial cells. Goblet cells dispersed among the intestinal epithelial cells are chiefly responsible for the synthesis and secretion of mucins within the gut and are heavily influenced by interactions with the immune system. Evidence from both clinical and animal studies have indicated that several GI conditions, including inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), colorectal cancer, and numerous enteric infections are accompanied by considerable changes in mucin quality and quantity. These changes include, but are not limited to, impaired goblet cell function, synthesis dysregulation, and altered post-translational modifications. The current review aims to highlight the structural and functional features as well as the production and immunological regulation of mucins and the impact these key elements have within the context of barrier function and host defense in intestinal inflammation.

Measuring intraocular antibodies in eyes treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the total intraocular aqueous humour antibody profiles in cases receiving anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) for retinal vascular disease compared with controls without retinal pathology. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. PARTICIPANTS: 93 aqueous humour samples: 22 eyes undergoing cataract surgery (controls) and 71 eyes receiving intravitreal injections (IVI) (cases) for macular edema or neovascularization. METHODS: Antibody isotyping of aqueous humour was performed using Milliplex MAP Human Isotyping Multiplex Assay. Cases and controls were compared for several outcome measures. RESULTS: The primary outcome measure was total mean antibody isotype concentration quantified in the aqueous humour. Secondary outcomes included comparing aqueous humour concentrations with visual acuity, number of IVI received, type of anti-VEGF agent injected, and persistence intra-/subretinal fluid post injection. Mean immunoglobulin M (IgM) concentrations in cases were 19-fold higher compared with controls. Aqueous immunoglobulin G (IgG)1,2,3,4 and immunoglobulin A (IgA) were 2-4-fold higher in cases compared with controls. Disease-specific trends were observed, with diabetic retinopathy (DR) eyes containing the highest amounts of aqueous antibodies. Total number of injections correlated with higher titres of IgG1 (p < 0.001), IgG2 (p < 0.009), and IgG3 (p < 0.001) in all cases analyzed with the strongest correlations seen in DR eyes (r = 0.77, p < 0.001). Presence of aqueous humour antibodies correlated with worse post-IVI best-corrected visual acuity; IgG1 (p < 0.01), IgG2 (p < 0.005), IgG3 (p < 0.01), and IgA (p < 0.003) in all cases analyzed, with the strongest correlations seen in DR eyes (r = 0.74, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Intraocular antibodies are present in the aqueous humour at significantly higher concentrations in eyes receiving IVIs for retinal vascular diseases compared with controls.