Interventions for Dry Eye: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.

Importance: Dry eye is a common ocular disease that can have substantial morbidity. Systematic reviews provide evidence for dry eye interventions and can be useful for patients, clinicians, and clinical guideline developers. Overviews of reviews use explicit and systematic methods to synthesize findings from multiple systematic reviews, but currently, there are no overviews of systematic reviews investigating interventions for dry eye. Objective: To summarize the results of reliable systematic reviews of dry eye interventions and to highlight the evidence gaps identified. Evidence Review: We searched the Cochrane Eyes and Vision US satellite database and included reliable systematic reviews evaluating dry eye interventions published from 2016 to 2022. We reported the proportion of systematic reviews that were reliable with reasons for unreliability. Critical and important outcomes from reliable systematic reviews were extracted and verified. Critical outcomes included dry eye-related patient-reported outcome measures. Results were synthesized from reliable systematic reviews to provide summaries of evidence for each intervention. Evidence for each intervention was defined as conclusive or inconclusive depending on whether high-certainty evidence across systematic reviews was available according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria and whether findings reached statistical or clinical significance. Recommendations were made for further research. Findings: Within the Cochrane Eyes and Vision US satellite database, 138 potentially relevant systematic reviews were identified, 71 were considered eligible, and 26 (37%) were assessed as reliable. Among reliable systematic reviews, no conclusive evidence was identified for any dry eye intervention. Inconclusive evidence suggested that environmental modifications, dietary modifications, artificial tears and lubricants, punctal occlusion, intense pulsed light therapy, vectored thermal pulsation therapy (Lipiflow), topical corticosteroids, topical cyclosporine A, topical secretagogues, and autologous serum may be effective. Only unreliable systematic reviews evaluated lifitegrast, oral antibiotics, and moisture chamber devices. Conclusions and Relevance: This overview of systematic reviews found some evidence that dry eye interventions may be effective, but no conclusive evidence was available. The conduct and reporting of most systematic reviews for dry eye interventions warrant improvement, and reliable systematic reviews are needed to evaluate lifitegrast, oral antibiotics, and moisture chamber devices.

Linfoma de Burkitt de localización abdominal: dos casos operados en el Hospital Al-Wahdah, Maabar, Yemen / Burkitt lymphoma in abdominal location: two cases operated on at Al-Wadah Hospital, Maabar, Yemen

Introducción. El linfoma de Burkitt no endémico es un tumor de frecuente localización abdominal, especialmente en niños y jóvenes. Aunque el tratamiento de elección es la quimioterapia, existe controversia sobre el papel que debe jugar la cirugía, especialmente en aquellos casos en los cuales el diagnóstico se establece durante una laparotomía exploradora.Materiales y métodos. Se presentan dos casos: una adolescente de 14 años que presentaba una masa hipogástrica y otra menor en fosa iliaca derecha de rápido crecimiento, y otro adolescente de 13 años con tumor en hipocondrio y flanco izquierdo. Se realizó resección de todo el tumor macroscópico, y se les remitió a quimioterapia.Resultados y discusión. La indicación del tratamiento quirúrgico en el linfoma de Burkitt no está claramente definida. Algunos autores no aceptan la cirugía y añaden que puede retrasar y complicar el tratamiento de quimioterapia, otros defienden la cirugía reductora de la masa tumoral asociada a la quimioterapia. Esta controversia es especialmente importante cuando el diagnóstico se establece en el curso de una laparotomía exploradora, durante la cual hay que decidir si se debe extirpar la masa tumoral o si no se debe hacer, tomando las medidas para evitar la falla renal aguda. En nuestro caso decidimos extirpar todo el tumor macroscópico. La buena evolución posoperatoria de nuestros pacientes y los resultados reportados por varios autores apoyan esta postura.