Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo de estudio
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Ophthalmol Retina ; 8(8): 733-743, 2024 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38519026

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To characterize the incidence of kidney failure associated with intravitreal anti-VEGF exposure; and compare the risk of kidney failure in patients treated with ranibizumab, aflibercept, or bevacizumab. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study across 12 databases in the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) network. SUBJECTS: Subjects aged ≥ 18 years with ≥ 3 monthly intravitreal anti-VEGF medications for a blinding disease (diabetic retinopathy, diabetic macular edema, exudative age-related macular degeneration, or retinal vein occlusion). METHODS: The standardized incidence proportions and rates of kidney failure while on treatment with anti-VEGF were calculated. For each comparison (e.g., aflibercept versus ranibizumab), patients from each group were matched 1:1 using propensity scores. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the risk of kidney failure while on treatment. A random effects meta-analysis was performed to combine each database's hazard ratio (HR) estimate into a single network-wide estimate. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence of kidney failure while on anti-VEGF treatment, and time from cohort entry to kidney failure. RESULTS: Of the 6.1 million patients with blinding diseases, 37 189 who received ranibizumab, 39 447 aflibercept, and 163 611 bevacizumab were included; the total treatment exposure time was 161 724 person-years. The average standardized incidence proportion of kidney failure was 678 per 100 000 persons (range, 0-2389), and incidence rate 742 per 100 000 person-years (range, 0-2661). The meta-analysis HR of kidney failure comparing aflibercept with ranibizumab was 1.01 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-1.47; P = 0.45), ranibizumab with bevacizumab 0.95 (95% CI, 0.68-1.32; P = 0.62), and aflibercept with bevacizumab 0.95 (95% CI, 0.65-1.39; P = 0.60). CONCLUSIONS: There was no substantially different relative risk of kidney failure between those who received ranibizumab, bevacizumab, or aflibercept. Practicing ophthalmologists and nephrologists should be aware of the risk of kidney failure among patients receiving intravitreal anti-VEGF medications and that there is little empirical evidence to preferentially choose among the specific intravitreal anti-VEGF agents. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.


Asunto(s)
Inhibidores de la Angiogénesis , Bevacizumab , Inyecciones Intravítreas , Ranibizumab , Receptores de Factores de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular , Proteínas Recombinantes de Fusión , Insuficiencia Renal , Factor A de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular , Humanos , Receptores de Factores de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular/administración & dosificación , Proteínas Recombinantes de Fusión/administración & dosificación , Proteínas Recombinantes de Fusión/efectos adversos , Ranibizumab/administración & dosificación , Ranibizumab/efectos adversos , Bevacizumab/administración & dosificación , Bevacizumab/efectos adversos , Inhibidores de la Angiogénesis/administración & dosificación , Inhibidores de la Angiogénesis/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Masculino , Femenino , Insuficiencia Renal/epidemiología , Insuficiencia Renal/complicaciones , Insuficiencia Renal/inducido químicamente , Incidencia , Anciano , Persona de Mediana Edad , Factor A de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular/antagonistas & inhibidores , Retinopatía Diabética/tratamiento farmacológico , Retinopatía Diabética/epidemiología , Retinopatía Diabética/diagnóstico , Retinopatía Diabética/complicaciones , Estudios de Seguimiento , Factores de Riesgo , Edema Macular/tratamiento farmacológico , Edema Macular/epidemiología , Edema Macular/diagnóstico , Oclusión de la Vena Retiniana/tratamiento farmacológico , Oclusión de la Vena Retiniana/diagnóstico , Oclusión de la Vena Retiniana/complicaciones , Oclusión de la Vena Retiniana/epidemiología , Ceguera/epidemiología , Ceguera/inducido químicamente , Ceguera/prevención & control , Ceguera/diagnóstico , Ceguera/etiología
2.
Lancet Rheumatol ; 1(4): e229-e236, 2019 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38229379

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: There is uncertainty around whether to use unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) or total knee replacement (TKR) for individuals with osteoarthritis confined to a single compartment of the knee. We aimed to emulate the design of the Total or Partial Knee Arthroplasty Trial (TOPKAT) using routinely collected data to assess whether the efficacy results reported in the trial translate into effectiveness in routine practice, and to assess comparative safety. METHODS: We did a population-based network study using data from four US and one UK health-care database, part of the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics network. The inclusion criteria were the same as those for TOPKAT; briefly, we identified patients aged at least 40 years with osteoarthritis who had undergone UKR or TKR and who had available data for at least one year prior to surgery. Patients were excluded if they had evidence of previous knee arthroplasty, knee fracture, knee surgery (except diagnostic), rheumatoid arthritis, infammatory arthropathies, or septic arthritis. Opioid use from 91-365 days after surgery, as a proxy for persistent pain, was assessed for all participants in all databases. Postoperative complications (ie, venous thromboembolism, infection, readmission, and mortality) were assessed over the 60 days after surgery and implant survival (as measured by revision procedures) was assessed over the 5 years after surgery. Outcomes were assessed in all databases, except for readmission, which was assessed in three of the databases, and mortality, which was assessed in two of the databases. Propensity score matched Cox proportional hazards models were fitted for each outcome. Calibrated hazard ratios (cHRs) were generated for each database to account for observed differences in control outcomes, and cHRs were then combined using meta-analysis. FINDINGS: 33 867 individuals who received UKR and 557 831 individuals who received TKR between Jan 1, 2005, and April 30, 2018, were eligible for matching. 32 379 with UKR and 250 377 with TKR were propensity score matched and informed the analyses. UKR was associated with a reduced risk of postoperative opioid use (cHR from meta-analysis 0·81, 95% CI 0·73-0·90) and a reduced risk of venous thromboembolism (0·62, 0·36-0·95), whereas no difference was seen for infection (0·85, 0·51-1·37) and readmission (0·79, 0·47-1·25). Evidence was insufficient to conclude whether there was a reduction in risk of mortality. UKR was also associated with an increased risk of revision (1·64, 1·40-1·94). INTERPRETATION: UKR was associated with a reduced risk of postoperative opioid use compared with TKR, which might indicate a reduced risk of persistent pain after surgery. UKR was associated with a lower risk of venous thromboembolism but an increased risk of revision compared with TKR. These findings can help to inform shared decision making for individuals eligible for knee replacement surgery. FUNDING: EU/European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations Innovative Medicines Initiative (2) Joint Undertaking (EHDEN).

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA