Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for neovascular glaucoma.

BACKGROUND: Neovascular glaucoma (NVG) is a potentially blinding, secondary glaucoma. It is caused by the formation of abnormal new blood vessels, which prevent normal drainage of aqueous from the anterior segment of the eye. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) medications are specific inhibitors of the primary mediators of neovascularization. Studies have reported the effectiveness of anti-VEGF medications for the control of intraocular pressure (IOP) in NVG. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of intraocular anti-VEGF medications, alone or with one or more types of conventional therapy, compared with no anti-VEGF medications for the treatment of NVG. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register); MEDLINE; Embase; PubMed; and LILACS to 19 October 2021; metaRegister of Controlled Trials to 19 October 2021; and two additional trial registers to 19 October 2021. We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic search for trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of people treated with anti-VEGF medications for NVG. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the search results for trials, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias, and the certainty of the evidence. We resolved discrepancies through discussion. MAIN RESULTS: We included five RCTs (356 eyes of 353 participants). Each trial was conducted in a different country: two in China, and one each in Brazil, Egypt, and Japan. All five RCTs included both men and women; the mean age of participants was 55 years or older. Two RCTs compared intravitreal bevacizumab combined with Ahmed valve implantation and panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) with Ahmed valve implantation and PRP alone. One RCT randomized participants to receive an injection of either intravitreal aflibercept or placebo at the first visit, followed by non-randomized treatment according to clinical findings after one week. The remaining two RCTs randomized participants to PRP with and without ranibizumab, one of which had insufficient details for further analysis. We assessed the RCTs to have an unclear risk of bias for most domains due to insufficient information to permit judgment.   Four RCTs examined achieving control of IOP, three of which reported our time points of interest. Only one RCT reported our critical time point at one month; it found that the anti-VEGF group had a 1.3-fold higher chance of achieving control of IOP at one month (RR 1.32, 95% 1.10 to 1.59; 93 participants) than the non-anti-VEGF group (low certainty of evidence). For other time points, one RCT found a three-fold greater achievement in control of IOP in the anti-VEGF group when compared with the non-anti-VEGF group at one year (RR 3.00; 95% CI:1.35 to 6.68; 40 participants). However, another RCT found an inconclusive result at the time period ranging from 1.5 years to three years (RR 1.08; 95% CI: 0.67 to 1.75; 40 participants).  All five RCTs examined mean IOP, but at different time points. Very-low-certainty evidence showed that anti-VEGFs were effective in reducing mean IOP by 6.37 mmHg (95% CI: -10.09 to -2.65; 3 RCTs; 173 participants) at four to six weeks when compared with no anti-VEGFs.  Anti-VEGFs may reduce mean IOP at three months (MD -4.25; 95% CI -12.05 to 3.54; 2 studies; 75 participants), six months (MD -5.93; 95% CI -18.13 to 6.26; 2 studies; 75 participants), one year (MD -5.36; 95% CI -18.50 to 7.77; 2 studies; 75 participants), and more than one year (MD -7.05; 95% CI -16.61 to 2.51; 2 studies; 75 participants) when compared with no anti-VEGFs, but such effects remain uncertain. Two RCTs reported the proportion of participants who achieved an improvement in visual acuity with specified time points. Participants receiving anti-VEGFs had a 2.6 times (95% CI 1.60 to 4.08; 1 study; 93 participants) higher chance of improving visual acuity when compared with those not receiving anti-VEGFs at one month (very low certainty of evidence). Likewise, another RCT found a similar result at 18 months (RR 4.00, 95% CI 1.33 to 12.05; 1 study; 40 participants).  Two RCTs reported the outcome, complete regression of new iris vessels, at our time points of interest. Low-certainty evidence showed that anti-VEGFs had a nearly three times higher chance of complete regression of new iris vessels when compared with no anti-VEGFs (RR 2.63, 95% CI 1.65 to 4.18; 1 study; 93 participants). A similar finding was observed at more than one year in another RCT (RR 3.20, 95% CI 1.45 to 7.05; 1 study; 40 participants).  Regarding adverse events, there was no evidence that the risks of hypotony and tractional retinal detachment were different between the two groups (RR 0.67; 95% CI: 0.12 to 3.57 and RR 0.33; 95% CI: 0.01 to 7.72, respectively; 1 study; 40 participants). No RCTs reported incidents of endophthalmitis, vitreous hemorrhage, no light perception, and serious adverse events. Evidence for the adverse events of anti-VEGFs was low due to limitations in the study design due to insufficient information to permit judgments and imprecision of results due to the small sample size. No trial reported the proportion of participants with relief of pain and resolution of redness at any time point. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Anti-VEGFs as an adjunct to conventional treatment could help reduce IOP in NVG in the short term (four to six weeks), but there is no evidence that this is likely in the longer term. Currently available evidence regarding the short- and long-term effectiveness and safety of anti-VEGFs in achieving control of IOP, visual acuity, and complete regression of new iris vessels in NVG is insufficient. More research is needed to investigate the effect of these medications compared with, or in addition to, conventional surgical or medical treatment in achieving these outcomes in NVG.

Cyclodestructive procedures for non-refractory glaucoma.

BACKGROUND: Glaucoma is a leading cause of blindness worldwide. It results in a progressive loss of peripheral vision and, in late stages, loss of central vision leading to blindness. Early treatment of glaucoma aims to prevent or delay vision loss. Elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) is the main causal modifiable risk factor for glaucoma. Aqueous outflow obstruction is the main cause of IOP elevation, which can be mitigated either by increasing outflow or reducing aqueous humor production. Cyclodestructive procedures use various methods to target and destroy the ciliary body epithelium, the site of aqueous humor production, thereby lowering IOP. The most common approach is laser cyclophotocoagulation. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of cyclodestructive procedures for the management of non-refractory glaucoma (i.e. glaucoma in an eye that has not undergone incisional glaucoma surgery). We also aimed to compare the effect of different routes of administration, laser delivery instruments, and parameters of cyclophotocoagulation with respect to IOP control, visual acuity, pain control, and adverse events. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2017, Issue 8); Ovid MEDLINE; Embase.com; LILACS; the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) and ClinicalTrials.gov. The date of the search was 7 August 2017. We also searched the reference lists of reports from included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials of participants who had undergone cyclodestruction as a primary treatment for glaucoma. We included only head-to-head trials that had compared cyclophotocoagulation to other procedural interventions, or compared cyclophotocoagulation using different types of lasers, delivery methods, parameters, or a combination of these factors. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened search results, assessed risks of bias, extracted data, and graded the certainty of the evidence in accordance with Cochrane standards. MAIN RESULTS: We included one trial (92 eyes of 92 participants) that evaluated the efficacy of diode transscleral cyclophotocoagulation (TSCPC) as primary surgical therapy. We identified no other eligible ongoing or completed trial. The included trial compared low-energy versus high-energy TSCPC in eyes with primary open-angle glaucoma. The trial was conducted in Ghana and had a mean follow-up period of 13.2 months post-treatment. In this trial, low-energy TSCPC was defined as 45.0 J delivered, high-energy as 65.5 J delivered; it is worth noting that other trials have defined high- and low-energy TSCPC differently. We assessed this trial to have had low risk of selection bias and reporting bias, unclear risk of performance bias, and high risk of detection bias and attrition bias. Trial authors excluded 13 participants with missing follow-up data; the analyses therefore included 40 (85%) of 47 participants in the low-energy group and 39 (87%) of 45 participants in the high-energy group.Control of IOP, defined as a decrease in IOP by 20% from baseline value, was achieved in 47% of eyes, at similar rates in the low-energy group and the high-energy groups; the small study size creates uncertainty about the significance of the difference, if any, between energy settings (risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 1.65; 79 participants; low-certainty evidence). The difference in effect between energy settings based on mean decrease in IOP, if any exists, also was uncertain (mean difference (MD) -0.50 mmHg, 95% CI -5.79 to 4.79; 79 participants; low-certainty evidence).Decreased vision was defined as the proportion of participants with a decrease of 2 or more lines on the Snellen chart or one or more categories of visual acuity when unable to read the eye chart. Twenty-three percent of eyes had a decrease in vision. The size of any difference between the low-energy group and the high-energy group was uncertain (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.76; 79 participants; low-certainty evidence). Data were not available for mean visual acuity and proportion of participants with vision change defined as greater than 1 line on the Snellen chart.The difference in the mean number of glaucoma medications used after cyclophotocoagulation was similar when comparing treatment groups (MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.63; 79 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Twenty percent of eyes were retreated; the estimated effect of energy settings on the need for retreatment was inconclusive (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.84; 79 participants; low-certainty evidence). No data for visual field, cost effectiveness, or quality-of-life outcomes were reported by the trial investigators.Adverse events were reported for the total study population, rather than by treatment group. The trial authors stated that most participants reported mild to moderate pain after the procedure, and many had transient conjunctival burns (percentages not reported). Severe iritis occurred in two eyes and hyphema occurred in three eyes. No instances of hypotony or phthisis bulbi were reported. The only adverse outcome that was reported by the treatment group was atonic pupil (RR 0.89 in the low-energy group, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.68; 92 participants; low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to evaluate the relative effectiveness and safety of cyclodestructive procedures for the primary procedural management of non-refractory glaucoma. Results from the one included trial did not compare cyclophotocoagulation to other procedural interventions and yielded uncertainty about any difference in outcomes when comparing low-energy versus high-energy diode TSCPC. Overall, the effect of laser treatment on IOP control was modest and the number of eyes experiencing vision loss was limited. More research is needed specific to the management of non-refractory glaucoma.

Macular versus Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Parameters for Diagnosing Manifest Glaucoma: A Systematic Review of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies.

TOPIC: Macular parameters have been proposed as an alternative to retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) parameters to diagnose glaucoma. Comparing the diagnostic accuracy of macular parameters, specifically the ganglion cell complex (GCC) and ganglion cell inner plexiform layer (GCIPL), with the accuracy of RNFL parameters for detecting manifest glaucoma is important to guide clinical practice and future research. METHODS: Studies using spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD OCT) and reporting macular parameters were included if they allowed the extraction of accuracy data for diagnosing manifest glaucoma, as confirmed with automated perimetry or a clinician's optic nerve head (ONH) assessment. Cross-sectional cohort studies and case-control studies were included. The QUADAS 2 tool was used to assess methodological quality. Only direct comparisons of macular versus RNFL parameters (i.e., in the same study) were conducted. Summary sensitivity and specificity of each macular or RNFL parameter were reported, and the relative diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was calculated in hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) models to compare them. RESULTS: Thirty-four studies investigated macular parameters using RTVue OCT (Optovue Inc., Fremont, CA) (19 studies, 3094 subjects), Cirrus OCT (Carl Zeiss Meditec Inc., Dublin, CA) (14 studies, 2164 subjects), or 3D Topcon OCT (Topcon, Inc., Tokyo, Japan) (4 studies, 522 subjects). Thirty-two of these studies allowed comparisons between macular and RNFL parameters. Studies generally reported sensitivities at fixed specificities, more commonly 0.90 or 0.95, with sensitivities of most best-performing parameters between 0.65 and 0.75. For all OCT devices, compared with RNFL parameters, macular parameters were similarly or slightly less accurate for detecting glaucoma at the highest reported specificity, which was confirmed in analyses at the lowest specificity. Included studies suffered from limitations, especially the case-control study design, which is known to overestimate accuracy. However, this flaw is less relevant as a source of bias in direct comparisons conducted within studies. CONCLUSIONS: With the use of OCT, RNFL parameters are still preferable to macular parameters for diagnosing manifest glaucoma, but the differences are small. Because of high heterogeneity, direct comparative or randomized studies of OCT devices or OCT parameters and diagnostic strategies are essential.

Peripheral iridotomy for pigmentary glaucoma.

BACKGROUND: Glaucoma is a chronic optic neuropathy characterized by retinal ganglion cell death resulting in damage to the optic nerve head and the retinal nerve fiber layer. Pigment dispersion syndrome is characterized by a structural disturbance in the iris pigment epithelium (the densely pigmented posterior surface of the iris) that leads to dispersion of the pigment and its deposition on various structures within the eye. Pigmentary glaucoma is a specific form of open-angle glaucoma found in patients with pigment dispersion syndrome.Topcial medical therapy is usually the first-line treatment; however, peripheral laser iridotomy has been proposed as an alternate treatment. Peripheral laser iridotomy involves creating an opening in the iris tissue to allow drainage of fluid from the posterior chamber to the anterior chamber and vice versa. Equalizing the pressure within the eye may help to alleviate the friction that leads to pigment dispersion and prevent visual field deterioration. However, the effectiveness of peripheral laser iridotomy in reducing the development or progression of pigmentary glaucoma is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of peripheral laser iridotomy compared with other interventions, including medication, trabeculoplasty, and trabeculectomy, or no treatment, for pigment dispersion syndrome and pigmentary glaucoma. SEARCH METHODS: We searched a number of electronic databases including CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE and clinical trials websites such as (mRCT) and ClinicalTrials.gov. We last searched the electronic databases on 2 November 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that had compared peripheral laser iridotomy versus no treatment or other treatments for pigment dispersion syndrome and pigmentary glaucoma. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures for systematic reviews. Two review authors independently screened articles for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed included trials for risk of bias. We did not perform a meta-analysis because of variability in reporting and follow-up intervals for primary and secondary outcomes of interest. MAIN RESULTS: We included five RCTs (260 eyes of 195 participants) comparing yttrium-aluminum-garnet (YAG) laser iridotomy versus no laser iridotomy. Three trials included participants with pigmentary glaucoma at baseline, and two trials enrolled participants with pigment dispersion syndrome. Only two trials reported the country of enrollment: one - Italy, the other - United Kingdom. Overall, we assessed trials as having high or unclear risk of bias owing to incomplete or missing data and selective outcome reporting.Data on visual fields were available for one of three trials that included participants with pigmentary glaucoma at baseline. At an average follow-up of 28 months, the risk of progression of visual field damage was uncertain when comparing laser iridotomy with no iridotomy (risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.16 to 6.25; 32 eyes; very low-quality evidence). The two trials that enrolled participants with pigment dispersion syndrome at baseline reported the proportion of participants with onset of glaucomatous visual field changes during the study period. At three-year follow-up, one trial reported that the risk ratio for conversion to glaucoma was 2.72 (95% CI 0.76 to 9.68; 42 eyes; very low-quality evidence). At 10-year follow-up, the other trial reported that no eye showed visual field progression.One trial reported the mean change in intraocular pressure (IOP) in eyes with pigmentary glaucoma: At an average of nine months of follow-up, the mean difference in IOP between groups was 2.69 mmHg less in the laser iridotomy group than in the control group (95% CI -6.05 to 0.67; 14 eyes; very low-quality evidence). This trial also reported the mean change in anterior chamber depth at an average of nine months of follow-up and reported no meaningful differences between groups (mean difference 0.04 mm, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.15; 14 eyes; very low-quality evidence). No other trial reported mean change in anterior chamber depth. Two trials reported greater flattening of iris configuration in the laser iridotomy group than in the control group among eyes with pigmentary glaucoma; however, investigators provided insufficient data for analysis. No trial reported data related to mean visual acuity, aqueous melanin granules, costs, or quality of life outcomes.Two trials assessed the need for additional treatment for control of IOP. One trial that enrolled participants with pigmentary glaucoma reported that more eyes in the laser iridotomy group required additional treatment between six and 23 months of follow-up than eyes in the control group (RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.75; 46 eyes); however, the other trial enrolled participants with pigment dispersion syndrome and indicated that the difference between groups at three-year follow-up was uncertain (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.38 to 2.17; 105 eyes). We graded the certainty of evidence for this outcome as very low.Two trials reported that no serious adverse events were observed in either group among eyes with pigment dispersion syndrome. Mild adverse events included postoperative inflammation; two participants required cataract surgery (at 18 and 34 months after baseline), and two participants required a repeat iridotomy. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found insufficient evidence of high quality on the effectiveness of peripheral iridotomy for pigmentary glaucoma or pigment dispersion syndrome. Although adverse events associated with peripheral iridotomy may be minimal, the long-term effects on visual function and other patient-important outcomes have not been established. Future research on this topic should focus on outcomes that are important to patients and the optimal timing of treatment in the disease process (eg, pigment dispersion syndrome with normal IOP, pigment dispersion syndrome with established ocular hypertension, pigmentary glaucoma).

Laser treatment of drusen to prevent progression to advanced age-related macular degeneration.

BACKGROUND: Drusen are amorphous yellowish deposits beneath the sensory retina. People with drusen, particularly large drusen, are at higher risk of developing age-related macular degeneration (AMD). The most common complication in AMD is choroidal neovascularisation (CNV), the growth of new blood vessels in the centre of the macula. The risk of CNV is higher among people who are already affected by CNV in one eye.It has been observed clinically that laser photocoagulation of drusen leads to their disappearance and may prevent the occurrence of advanced disease (CNV or geographic atrophy) associated with visual loss. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness and adverse effects of laser photocoagulation of drusen in AMD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (2015, Issue 7), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to August 2015), EMBASE (January 1980 to August 2015), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (January 1982 to August 2015), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 3 August 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of laser treatment of drusen in AMD in which laser treatment had been compared with no intervention or sham treatment. Two types of trials were included. Some trials studied one eye of each participant (unilateral studies); other studies recruited participants with bilateral drusen and randomised one eye to photocoagulation or control and the fellow eye to the other group. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data. We pooled data from unilateral and bilateral studies using a random-effects model. For the bilateral studies, we estimated the within-person correlation coefficient from one study and assumed it was valid for the others. MAIN RESULTS: The update of this review found two additional studies, totaling 11 studies that randomised 2159 participants (3580 eyes) and followed them up to two years, of which six studies (1454 participants) included people with one eye randomised to treatment and one to control. Studies were conducted in Australia, Europe and North America.Overall, the risk of bias in the included studies was low, particularly for the larger studies and for the primary outcome development of CNV. Photocoagulation did not reduce the development of CNV at two years' follow-up (odds ratio (OR) 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 1.46, 11 studies, 2159 participants (3580 eyes), high quality evidence). This estimate means that, given an overall occurrence of CNV of 8.3% in the control group, we estimated an absolute risk reduction by no more than 1.4% in the laser group, according to the lower CI limit. Only two studies investigated the effect on the development of geographic atrophy and could not show a difference, but estimates were imprecise (OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.38 to 4.51, two studies, 148 participants (148 eyes), low quality evidence).Among secondary outcomes, photocoagulation led to drusen reduction (OR 9.16, 95% CI 6.28 to 13.4, three studies, 570 participants (944 eyes), high quality evidence) but was not shown to limit loss of 3 or more lines of visual acuity (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.22, nine studies, 2002 participants (2386 eyes), moderate quality evidence).In a subgroup analysis, no difference could be shown for conventional visible (eight studies) versus subthreshold invisible (four studies) photocoagulation for the primary outcomes (P value = 0.29). The effect in the subthreshold group did not suggest a relevant benefit (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.98). No study used micropulse subthreshold photocoagulation.No other adverse effects (apart from development of CNV, geographic atrophy or visual loss) were reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The trials included in this review confirm the clinical observation that laser photocoagulation of drusen leads to their disappearance. However, treatment does not result in a reduction in the risk of developing CNV, and was not shown to limit the occurrence of geographic atrophy or visual acuity loss.Ongoing studies are being conducted to assess whether the use of extremely short laser pulses (i.e. nanosecond laser treatment) cannot only lead to drusen regression but also prevent neovascular AMD.

Optic nerve head and fibre layer imaging for diagnosing glaucoma.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of glaucoma is traditionally based on the finding of optic nerve head (ONH) damage assessed subjectively by ophthalmoscopy or photography or by corresponding damage to the visual field assessed by automated perimetry, or both. Diagnostic assessments are usually required when ophthalmologists or primary eye care professionals find elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) or a suspect appearance of the ONH. Imaging tests such as confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (HRT), optical coherence tomography (OCT) and scanning laser polarimetry (SLP, as used by the GDx instrument), provide an objective measure of the structural changes of retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) thickness and ONH parameters occurring in glaucoma. OBJECTIVES: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of HRT, OCT and GDx for diagnosing manifest glaucoma by detecting ONH and RNFL damage. SEARCH METHODS: We searched several databases for this review. The most recent searches were on 19 February 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included prospective and retrospective cohort studies and case-control studies that evaluated the accuracy of OCT, HRT or the GDx for diagnosing glaucoma. We excluded population-based screening studies, since we planned to consider studies on self-referred people or participants in whom a risk factor for glaucoma had already been identified in primary care, such as elevated IOP or a family history of glaucoma. We only considered recent commercial versions of the tests: spectral domain OCT, HRT III and GDx VCC or ECC. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We adopted standard Cochrane methods. We fitted a hierarchical summary ROC (HSROC) model using the METADAS macro in SAS software. After studies were selected, we decided to use 2 x 2 data at 0.95 specificity or closer in meta-analyses, since this was the most commonly-reported level. MAIN RESULTS: We included 106 studies in this review, which analysed 16,260 eyes (8353 cases, 7907 controls) in total. Forty studies (5574 participants) assessed GDx, 18 studies (3550 participants) HRT, and 63 (9390 participants) OCT, with 12 of these studies comparing two or three tests. Regarding study quality, a case-control design in 103 studies raised concerns as it can overestimate accuracy and reduce the applicability of the results to daily practice. Twenty-four studies were sponsored by the manufacturer, and in 15 the potential conflict of interest was unclear.Comparisons made within each test were more reliable than those between tests, as they were mostly based on direct comparisons within each study.The Nerve Fibre Indicator yielded the highest accuracy (estimate, 95% confidence interval (CI)) among GDx parameters (sensitivity: 0.67, 0.55 to 0.77; specificity: 0.94, 0.92 to 0.95). For HRT measures, the Vertical Cup/Disc (C/D) ratio (sensitivity: 0.72, 0.60 to 0.68; specificity: 0.94, 0.92 to 0.95) was no different from other parameters. With OCT, the accuracy of average RNFL retinal thickness was similar to the inferior sector (0.72, 0.65 to 0.77; specificity: 0.93, 0.92 to 0.95) and, in different studies, to the vertical C/D ratio.Comparing the parameters with the highest diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) for each device in a single HSROC model, the performance of GDx, HRT and OCT was remarkably similar. At a sensitivity of 0.70 and a high specificity close to 0.95 as in most of these studies, in 1000 people referred by primary eye care, of whom 200 have manifest glaucoma, such as in those who have already undergone some functional or anatomic testing by optometrists, the best measures of GDx, HRT and OCT would miss about 60 cases out of the 200 patients with glaucoma, and would incorrectly refer 50 out of 800 patients without glaucoma. If prevalence were 5%, e.g. such as in people referred only because of family history of glaucoma, the corresponding figures would be 15 patients missed out of 50 with manifest glaucoma, avoiding referral of about 890 out of 950 non-glaucomatous people.Heterogeneity investigations found that sensitivity estimate was higher for studies with more severe glaucoma, expressed as worse average mean deviation (MD): 0.79 (0.74 to 0.83) for MD < -6 db versus 0.64 (0.60 to 0.69) for MD ≥ -6 db, at a similar summary specificity (0.93, 95% CI 0.92 to 0.94 and, respectively, 0.94; 95% CI 0.93 to 0.95; P < 0.0001 for the difference in relative DOR). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of imaging tests for detecting manifest glaucoma was variable across studies, but overall similar for different devices. Accuracy may have been overestimated due to the case-control design, which is a serious limitation of the current evidence base.We recommend that further diagnostic accuracy studies are carried out on patients selected consecutively at a defined step of the clinical pathway, providing a description of risk factors leading to referral and bearing in mind the consequences of false positives and false negatives in the setting in which the diagnostic question is made. Future research should report accuracy for each threshold of these continuous measures, or publish raw data.

Optical coherence tomography (OCT) for detection of macular oedema in patients with diabetic retinopathy.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic macular oedema (DMO) is a thickening of the central retina, or the macula, and is associated with long-term visual loss in people with diabetic retinopathy (DR). Clinically significant macular oedema (CSMO) is the most severe form of DMO. Almost 30 years ago, the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) found that CSMO, diagnosed by means of stereoscopic fundus photography, leads to moderate visual loss in one of four people within three years. It also showed that grid or focal laser photocoagulation to the macula halves this risk. Recently, intravitreal injection of antiangiogenic drugs has also been used to try to improve vision in people with macular oedema due to DR.Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is based on optical reflectivity and is able to image retinal thickness and structure producing cross-sectional and three-dimensional images of the central retina. It is widely used because it provides objective and quantitative assessment of macular oedema, unlike the subjectivity of fundus biomicroscopic assessment which is routinely used by ophthalmologists instead of photography. Optical coherence tomography is also used for quantitative follow-up of the effects of treatment of CSMO. OBJECTIVES: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of OCT for detecting DMO and CSMO, defined according to ETDRS in 1985, in patients referred to ophthalmologists after DR is detected. In the update of this review we also aimed to assess whether OCT might be considered the new reference standard for detecting DMO. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), the Health Technology Assessment Database (HTA) and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHSEED) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 5), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to June 2013), EMBASE (January 1950 to June 2013), Web of Science Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science (CPCI-S) (January 1990 to June 2013), BIOSIS Previews (January 1969 to June 2013), MEDION and the Aggressive Research Intelligence Facility database (ARIF). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 25 June 2013. We checked bibliographies of relevant studies for additional references. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected studies that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of any OCT model for detecting DMO or CSMO in patients with DR who were referred to eye clinics. Diabetic macular oedema and CSMO were diagnosed by means of fundus biomicroscopy by ophthalmologists or stereophotography by ophthalmologists or other trained personnel. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three authors independently extracted data on study characteristics and measures of accuracy. We assessed data using random-effects hierarchical sROC meta-analysis models. MAIN RESULTS: We included 10 studies (830 participants, 1387 eyes), published between 1998 and 2012. Prevalence of CSMO was 19% to 65% (median 50%) in nine studies with CSMO as the target condition. Study quality was often unclear or at high risk of bias for QUADAS 2 items, specifically regarding study population selection and the exclusion of participants with poor quality images. Applicablity was unclear in all studies since professionals referring patients and results of prior testing were not reported. There was a specific 'unit of analysis' issue because both eyes of the majority of participants were included in the analyses as if they were independent.In nine studies providing data on CSMO (759 participants, 1303 eyes), pooled sensitivity was 0.78 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 0.83) and specificity was 0.86 (95% CI 0.76 to 0.93). The median central retinal thickness cut-off we selected for data extraction was 250 µm (range 230 µm to 300 µm). Central CSMO was the target condition in all but two studies and thus our results cannot be applied to non-central CSMO.Data from three studies reporting accuracy for detection of DMO (180 participants, 343 eyes) were not pooled. Sensitivities and specificities were about 0.80 in two studies and were both 1.00 in the third study.Since this review was conceived, the role of OCT has changed and has become a key ingredient of decision-making at all levels of ophthalmic care in this field. Moreover, disagreements between OCT and fundus examination are informative, especially false positives which are referred to as subclinical DMO and are at higher risk of developing clinical CSMO. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Using retinal thickness thresholds lower than 300 µm and ophthalmologist's fundus assessment as reference standard, central retinal thickness measured with OCT was not sufficiently accurate to diagnose the central type of CSMO in patients with DR referred to retina clinics. However, at least OCT false positives are generally cases of subclinical DMO that cannot be detected clinically but still suffer from increased risk of disease progression. Therefore, the increasing availability of OCT devices, together with their precision and the ability to inform on retinal layer structure, now make OCT widely recognised as the new reference standard for assessment of DMO, even in some screening settings. Thus, this review will not be updated further.

Treatment with citicoline eye drops enhances retinal function and neural conduction along the visual pathways in open angle glaucoma.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the retinal function and the neural conduction along the visual pathways after treatment with citicoline eye drops in patients with open angle glaucoma (OAG). METHODS: Fifty-six OAG patients (mean age 52.4 ± 4.72 years, IOP <18 mmHg with beta-blocker monotherapy only) were enrolled. Of these, 47 eyes completed the study: 24 OAG eyes were treated with topical citicoline (OMK1®, Omikron Italia, 3 drops/day) (GC eyes) over a 4-month period (month 4) followed by a 2-month period of citicoline wash-out (month 6), and another 23 OAG eyes were only treated with beta-blocker monotherapy (GP eyes). In GC and GP eyes, pattern electroretinogram (PERG) and visual evoked potentials (VEP) were assessed at baseline and at months 4 and 6 in both groups. RESULTS: At baseline, similar (ANOVA, p > 0.01) PERG and VEP values in GC and GP eyes were observed. After treatment with topical citicoline, a significant (p < 0.01) increase of PERG P50-N95 and VEP N75-P100 amplitudes, and a significant (p < 0.01) shortening of VEP P100 implicit times were found. In GC eyes, the shortening of VEP P100 implicit times was correlated significantly (p < 0.01) with the increase of PERG P50-N95 amplitudes. After a 2-month period of topical Citicoline wash-out, PERG and VEP values were similar (p > 0.01) to baseline ones. GP eyes showed not significant changes of PERG and VEP values during the entire follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Topical treatment with citicoline in OAG eyes induces an enhancement of the retinal bioelectrical responses (increase of PERG amplitude) with a consequent improvement of the bioelectrical activity of the visual cortex (shortening and increase of VEP implicit time and amplitude, respectively).

Cytidine 5'-Diphosphocholine (Citicoline) in Glaucoma: Rationale of Its Use, Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.

Cytidine 5'-diphosphocholine or citicoline is an endogenous compound that acts in the biosynthetic pathway of phospholipids of cell membranes, particularly phosphatidylcholine, and it is able to increase neurotrasmitters levels in the central nervous system. Citicoline has shown positive effects in Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease, as well as in amblyopia. Glaucoma is a neurodegenerative disease currently considered a disease involving ocular and visual brain structures. Neuroprotection has been proposed as a valid therapeutic option for those patients progressing despite a well-controlled intraocular pressure, the main risk factor for the progression of the disease. The aim of this review is to critically summarize the current evidence about the effect of citicoline in glaucoma.

Laser photocoagulation for proliferative diabetic retinopathy.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic retinopathy is a complication of diabetes in which high blood sugar levels damage the blood vessels in the retina. Sometimes new blood vessels grow in the retina, and these can have harmful effects; this is known as proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Laser photocoagulation is an intervention that is commonly used to treat diabetic retinopathy, in which light energy is applied to the retina with the aim of stopping the growth and development of new blood vessels, and thereby preserving vision. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of laser photocoagulation for diabetic retinopathy compared to no treatment or deferred treatment. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (2014, Issue 5), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to June 2014), EMBASE (January 1980 to June 2014), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 3 June 2014. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where people (or eyes) with diabetic retinopathy were randomly allocated to laser photocoagulation or no treatment or deferred treatment. We excluded trials of lasers that are no longer in routine use. Our primary outcome was the proportion of people who lost 15 or more letters (3 lines) of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) as measured on a logMAR chart at 12 months. We also looked at longer-term follow-up of the primary outcome at two to five years. Secondary outcomes included mean best corrected distance visual acuity, severe visual loss, mean near visual acuity, progression of diabetic retinopathy, quality of life, pain, loss of driving licence, vitreous haemorrhage and retinal detachment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methods as expected by the Cochrane Collaboration. Two review authors selected studies and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: We identified a large number of trials of laser photocoagulation of diabetic retinopathy (n = 83) but only five of these studies were eligible for inclusion in the review, i.e. they compared laser photocoagulation with currently available lasers to no (or deferred) treatment. Three studies were conducted in the USA, one study in the UK and one study in Japan. A total of 4786 people (9503 eyes) were included in these studies. The majority of participants in four of these trials were people with proliferative diabetic retinopathy; one trial recruited mainly people with non-proliferative retinopathy. Four of the studies evaluated panretinal photocoagulation with argon laser and one study investigated selective photocoagulation of non-perfusion areas. Three studies compared laser treatment to no treatment and two studies compared laser treatment to deferred laser treatment. All studies were at risk of performance bias because the treatment and control were different and no study attempted to produce a sham treatment. Three studies were considered to be at risk of attrition bias.At 12 months there was little difference between eyes that received laser photocoagulation and those allocated to no treatment (or deferred treatment), in terms of loss of 15 or more letters of visual acuity (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 1.11; 8926 eyes; 2 RCTs, low quality evidence). Longer term follow-up did not show a consistent pattern, but one study found a 20% reduction in risk of loss of 15 or more letters of visual acuity at five years with laser treatment. Treatment with laser reduced the risk of severe visual loss by over 50% at 12 months (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.86; 9276 eyes; 4 RCTs, moderate quality evidence). There was a beneficial effect on progression of diabetic retinopathy with treated eyes experiencing a 50% reduction in risk of progression of diabetic retinopathy (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.64; 8331 eyes; 4 RCTs, low quality evidence) and a similar reduction in risk of vitreous haemorrhage (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.85; 224 eyes; 2 RCTs, low quality evidence).None of the studies reported near visual acuity or patient-relevant outcomes such as quality of life, pain, loss of driving licence or adverse effects such as retinal detachment.We did not plan any subgroup analyses, but there was a difference in baseline risk in participants with non-proliferative retinopathy compared to those with proliferative retinopathy. With the small number of included studies we could not do a formal subgroup analysis comparing effect in proliferative and non-proliferative retinopathy. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review provides evidence that laser photocoagulation is beneficial in treating proliferative diabetic retinopathy. We judged the evidence to be moderate or low, depending on the outcome. This is partly related to reporting of trials conducted many years ago, after which panretinal photocoagulation has become the mainstay of treatment of proliferative diabetic retinopathy.Future Cochrane Reviews on variations in the laser treatment protocol are planned. Future research on laser photocoagulation should investigate the combination of laser photocoagulation with newer treatments such as anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGFs).

Combination medical treatment for primary open angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension: a network meta-analysis.

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: The objectives of this review are to examine the comparative effectiveness and safety of different glaucoma fixed combination therapies and monotherapies in eyes with primary open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension and to provide relative rankings of these treatments.

The current use of glaucoma virtual clinics in Europe.

OBJECTIVES: To assess and describe current utilisation, characteristics and perspectives on virtual glaucoma clinics (VGCs) amongst European glaucoma specialists. METHODS: Cross-sectional, anonymized, online questionnaire distributed to all European Glaucoma Society-registered specialists. Questions were stratified into five domains: Demographics, Questions about VGC use, Questions for non-VGC users, COVID-19 effects, and VGC advantages/disadvantages. RESULTS: 30% of 169 participants currently use VGCs, with 53% based in the United Kingdom. Of those using VGCs, 85% reported higher patient acceptance compared to traditional care. The commonest virtual model was asynchronous remote monitoring (54%). Nurses (49%) and ophthalmic technicians (46%) were mostly responsible for data collection, with two-thirds using a mixture of professionals. Consultant ophthalmologists were the main decision-makers in 51% of VGCs. Preferred cohorts were: ocular hypertension (85%), glaucoma suspects (80%), early/moderate glaucoma in worse eye (68%), stable glaucoma irrespective of treatment (59%) and stable glaucoma on monotherapy (51%). Commonest investigations were: IOP (90%), BCVA (88%), visual field testing (85%) and OCT (78%), with 33 different combinations. Reasons for face-to-face referral included: visual field progression (80%), 'above-target' IOP (63%), and OCT progression (51%). Reasons for not using VGCs included: lack of experience (47%), adequate systems in place (42%), no appropriate staff (34%) and insufficient time/money (34%). 55% of non-VGC users are interested in their use with 38% currently considering future implementation. 83% stated VGC consultations have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic; 86% of all participants felt that the pandemic has highlighted the importance of VGCs. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of European glaucoma units are currently using VGCs, while others are considering implementation. Financial reimbursement and consensus guidelines are potentially crucial steps in VGC uptake.

Ubiquitin proteasome system and glaucoma: A survey of genetics and molecular biology studies supporting a link with pathogenic and therapeutic relevance.

Glaucoma represents a group of progressive neurodegenerative diseases characterized by the loss of retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) and their axons with subsequent visual field impairment. The disease develops through largely uncharacterized molecular mechanisms, that are likely to occur in different localized cell types, either in the anterior (e.g., trabecular meshwork cells) or posterior (e.g., Muller glia, retinal ganglion cells) segments of the eye. Genomic and preclinical studies suggest that glaucoma pathogenesis may develop through altered ubiquitin (Ub) signaling. Ubiquitin conjugation, referred to as ubiquitylation, is a major post-synthetic modification catalyzed by E1-E2-E3 enzymes, that profoundly regulates the turnover, trafficking and biological activity of the targeted protein. The development of new technologies, including proteomics workflows, allows the biology of ubiquitin signaling to be described in health and disease. This post-translational modification is emerging as a key role player in neurodegeneration, gaining relevance for novel therapeutic options, such as in the case of Proteolysis Targeting Chimeras technology. Although scientific evidence supports a link between Ub and glaucoma, their relationship is still not well-understood. Therefore, this review provides a detailed research-oriented discussion on current evidence of Ub signaling in glaucoma. A review of genomic and genetic data is provided followed by an in-depth discussion of experimental data on ASB10, parkin and optineurin, which are proteins that play a key role in Ub signaling and have been associated with glaucoma.

Glaucoma Progression Diagnosis: The Agreement between Clinical Judgment and Statistical Software.

Background: To explore the agreement between clinical judgment and Guided Progression Analysis II (GPAII) in the evaluation of visual fields (VF) progression in patients with glaucoma. Methods: Three glaucoma experts and three general ophthalmologists were asked to rate the VF series by classifying them as progressive through the observation of the overview report. The agreement between clinical judgment and GPAII event analysis (EA) and trend analysis (TA) was assessed by Cohen statistic. The sensitivity and specificity of clinical judgment in detecting the presence of progression was evaluated considering the results of GPAII as the reference standard. Results: 66 VF series were included in the study. Glaucoma experts, general ophthalmologists, GPAII EA, and GPAII TA found progression in 39%, 38%, 15%, and 21% of the VF series (p < 0.05). The clinical judgment of glaucoma experts and general ophthalmologists was discordant with GPAII EA in 27.2% and 28.7% (k = 0.35, 95% CI 0.15−0.56 and k = 0.30, 95% CI 0.09−0.52) and with GPAII TA in 21.2% and 25.7% of the VF series examined (k = 0.51, 95% CI 0.31−0.72 and k = 0.41, 95% CI 0.18−0.62). Considering the GPAII EA and TA as reference standard, glaucoma experts showed a sensitivity of 90% and 92.8% and a specificity of 69.6% and 75%, while general ophthalmologists showed a sensitivity of 80% and 78.5% and a specificity of 69.6% and 73%. Conclusions: The agreement between clinical judgment and GPAII ranges from fair to moderate. Glaucoma experts showed better ability than general ophthalmologists in detecting VF progression.

Influence of disc size on optic nerve head versus retinal nerve fiber layer assessment for diagnosing glaucoma.

PURPOSE: To explore and compare the influence of optic disc size on the diagnostic accuracy of retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness and optic nerve head (ONH) quantitative assessment. DESIGN: Observational, cross-sectional evaluation of diagnostic tests. PARTICIPANTS: We included 120 eyes from 50 normal subjects and 70 glaucomatous patients classified by the presence of a repeatable visual field defect for the analysis. TESTING: The RNFL thickness was measured by scanning laser polarimetry with variable corneal compensator (GDx-VCC, Carl-Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA) and spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc). We obtained ONH imaging by means of confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (HRT3; Heidelberg Engineering, GmbH, Dossenheim, Germany). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity and specificity for normative classifications, sensitivity at fixed specificity and area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) for continuous parameters. A logistic marginal regression model and coefficients of variation (CoV) have been used to test and quantify the influence of optic disc size on the diagnostic accuracy of the 3 technologies under investigation. RESULTS: Among continuous parameters average RNFL thickness for Cirrus HD-OCT, nerve fiber indicator for GDx-VCC and cup shape measure for the HRT3 showed the best diagnostic accuracy with an AUC of 0.97, 0.94, and 0.94, respectively. Among normative classifications, the highest sensitivity and specificity were found for OCT average RNFL thickness (75.8% and 94.7%), for GDx superior thickness (77.1% and 97.5%), for HRT3 Moorfields regression analysis result (89.4% and 73.7%) and for HRT3 GPS global (92.3% and 76.5%). The diagnostic performance of HRT3 parameters seemed to be significantly influenced by optic disc size, although the same was not true for Cirrus HD-OCT and GDx VCC. The most steady performers for each imaging device across disc size groups were Cirrus HD-OCT average thickness (CoV, 1.6%), GDx-VCC inferior thickness (CoV, 2.5%), and HRT3 GPS temporal and nasal (CoV, 21.4%). CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic accuracy of quantitative RNFL assessment as performed by Cirrus HD-OCT and GDx-VCC is high and virtually unaffected or only minimally affected by the size of the optic disc and may provide more consistent diagnostic outcomes across small and large discs than ONH assessment as performed by HRT3.

A rare case of endophthalmitis after bleb needle revision for glaucoma Xen® gel stent.

PURPOSE: To describe the first case of endophthalmitis caused by Sphingobacterium spiritivorum, a glucose non-fermenting Gram-negative rod, in a patient previously implanted with a Xen® gel stent. CASE REPORT DESCRIPTION: An 83-year-old patient, affected by open-angle glaucoma and with a previous surgery of combined cataract extraction and Xen gel stent implantation, developed endophthalmitis 1 month after bleb needle revision with 5-fluorouracil injection. At presentation, best corrected visual acuity was hand movement, hypopyon was evident into the anterior chamber and a flat bleb with no sign of leakage was present over the Xen gel implant. OUTCOME: Immediate pars plana vitrectomy was performed, with intravitreal antibiotic administration and silicon oil tamponade. S. spiritivorum was isolated from vitreous bacterial culture. According to the antibiogram, patient was treated with topical fortified ceftazidime eyedrops and appropriate systemic antibiotics (intravenous meropenem, 500 mg every 8 h for 7 days, followed by oral cotrimoxazole, 160 + 800 mg, twice a day for 10 days). After 2 weeks of treatment, ocular inflammation was resolved, best corrected visual acuity was 0.1 (Snellen chart) and intraocular pressure was 18 mm Hg without topical hypotensive therapy. CONCLUSION: S. spiritivorum was isolated for the first time as a causative agent of endophthalmitis in humans. Bleb needle revision in patients with Xen gel implant is not free of complications, and an attentive follow-up is required.

Accuracy of optical coherence tomography for diagnosing glaucoma: an overview of systematic reviews.

AIMS: To assess the diagnostic accuracy (DTA) of optical coherence tomography (OCT) for detecting glaucoma by systematically searching and appraising systematic reviews (SRs) on this issue. METHODS: We searched a database of SRs in eyes and vision maintained by the Cochrane Eyes and Vision United States on the DTA of OCT for detecting glaucoma. Two authors working independently screened the records, abstracted data and assessed the risk of bias using the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews checklist. We extracted quantitative DTA estimates as well as qualitative statements on their relevance to practice. RESULTS: We included four SRs published between 2015 and 2018. These SRs included between 17 and 113 studies on OCT for glaucoma diagnosis. Two reviews were at low risk of bias and the other two had two to four domains at high or unclear risk of bias with concerns on applicability. The two reliable SRs reported the accuracy of average retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) thickness and found a sensitivity of 0.69 (0.63 to 0.73) and 0.78 (0.74 to 0.83) and a specificity of 0.94 (0.93 to 0.95) and 0.93 (0.92 to 0.95) in 57 and 50 studies, respectively. Only one review included a clear specification of the clinical pathway. Both reviews highlighted the limitations of primary DTA studies on this topic. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of published DTA reviews on OCT for diagnosing glaucoma was mixed. Two reliable SRs found moderate sensitivity at high specificity for average RNFL thickness in diagnosing manifest glaucoma. Our overview suggests that the methodological quality of both primary and secondary DTA research on glaucoma is in need of improvement.

Confocal Microscopy and Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography Imaging of the Ocular Surface and Bleb Morphology in Medically and Surgically Treated Glaucoma Patients: A Review.

Glaucoma patients often suffer from ocular surface disease (OSD) caused by the chronic administration of topical anti-glaucoma medications, especially in cases of long-term therapy with preserved or multiple drugs. Additionally, glaucoma surgery may determine ocular surface changes related to the formation and location of the filtering bleb, the application of anti-mitotic agents, and the post-operative wound-healing processes within the conjunctiva. Recently, several studies have evaluated the role of advanced diagnostic imaging technologies such as in vivo confocal microscopy (IVCM) and anterior segment-optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) in detecting microscopic and macroscopic features of glaucoma therapy-related OSD. Their clinical applications are still being explored, with recent particular attention paid to analyzing the effects of new drug formulations and of minimally invasive surgical procedures on the ocular surface status. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge about the main changes of the ocular surface identified at IVCM and AS-OCT in glaucoma patients under medical therapy, or after surgical treatment.

Glaucoma and neuroinflammation: An overview.

Glaucoma is an optic neuropathy characterized by well-defined optic disc morphological changes (i.e., cup enlargement, neuroretinal border thinning, and notching, papillary vessel modifications) consequent to retinal ganglion cell loss, axonal degeneration, and lamina cribrosa remodeling. These modifications tend to be progressive and are the main cause of functional damage in glaucoma. Despite the latest findings about the pathophysiology of the disease, the exact trigger mechanisms and the mechanism of degeneration of retinal ganglion cells and their axons have not been completely elucidated. Neuroinflammation may play a role in both the development and the progression of the disease as a result of its effects on retinal environment and retinal ganglion cells. We summarize the latest findings about neuroinflammation in glaucoma and examine the connection between risk factors, neuroinflammation, and retinal ganglion cell degeneration.

What Do We Really Know about the Effectiveness of Glaucoma Interventions?: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.

PURPOSE: To identify systematic reviews of interventions for glaucoma conditions and to assess their reliability, thereby generating a list of potentially reliable reviews for updating glaucoma practice guidelines. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Systematic reviews of interventions for glaucoma conditions. METHODS: We used a database of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in vision research and eye care maintained by the Cochrane Eyes and Vision United States Satellite. We examined all Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions for glaucoma conditions published before August 7, 2019, and all non-Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions for glaucoma conditions published between January 1, 2014, and August 7, 2019. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We assessed eligible reviews for reliability, extracted characteristics, and summarized key findings from reviews classified as reliable. RESULTS: Of the 4451 systematic reviews in eyes and vision identified, 129 met our eligibility criteria and were assessed for reliability. Of these, we classified 49 (38%) as reliable. We found open-angle glaucoma (22/49) to be the condition with the most reviews and medical management (17/49) and intraocular pressure (IOP; 43/49) to be the most common interventions and outcomes studied. Most reviews found a high degree of uncertainty in the evidence, which hinders the possibility of making strong recommendations in guidelines. These reviews found high-certainty evidence about a few topics: reducing IOP helps to prevent glaucoma and its progression, prostaglandin analogs are the most effective medical treatment for lowering IOP, laser trabeculoplasty is as effective as medical treatment as a first-line therapy in controlling IOP, the use of IOP-lowering medications in the perioperative or postoperative periods to accompany laser (e.g., trabeculoplasty) reduces the risk of postoperative IOP spikes, conventional surgery (i.e., trabeculectomy) is more effective than medications in reducing IOP, and antimetabolites and ß-radiation improve IOP control after trabeculectomy. The evidence is weak regarding the effectiveness of minimally invasive glaucoma surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: Most systematic reviews evaluating interventions for glaucoma are of poor reliability. Even among those that may be considered reliable, important limitations exist in the value of information because of the uncertainty of the evidence as well as small and sometimes unimportant clinical differences between interventions.