Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Montrer: 20 | 50 | 100
Résultats 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrer
Plus de filtres










Base de données
Gamme d'année
1.
Int J Ophthalmol ; 17(8): 1437-1446, 2024.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39156774

RÉSUMÉ

AIM: To assess and compare the variations and agreements across different ocular biometric parameters using swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) and Scheimpflug tomography in patients diagnosed with cataract. METHODS: This prospective case series was conducted at Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital. In total, 212 eyes from 212 patients scheduled for phacoemulsification were included. Eyes were evaluated preoperatively using two SS-OCT devices (IOLMaster700 and CASIA2) and Scheimpflug tomography (Pentacam). Central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), aqueous depth (AQD), white-to-white distance (WTW), flat simulated keratometry (Kf), steep simulated keratometry (Ks), mean keratometry (Km), and total corneal keratometry (TKm) were measured. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), 95% confidence intervals (CI) and limits of agreement (LoA) widths were conducted to assess differences and correlations between devices. RESULTS: All parameters, except for Ks, were significantly different. Pairwise comparison revealed no significant differences between keratometry obtained by IOLMaster 700 and Pentacam. LoA widths of all paired comparisons for Ks were >0.80 D. Except for WTW between IOLMaster 700 and CASIA2 and between CASIA2 and Pentacam, other Pearson's coefficients between devices showed a strong correlation (all r>0.95). The ICC of WTW (ICC=0.438, 95%CI 0.167-0.625) showed poor reliability. The reliability of CCT, ACD, and AQD was excellent (all ICC>0.95), whereas that of TKm was good (ICC=0.827, 95%CI 0.221-0.939). A significant linear correlation was also observed among devices. CONCLUSION: The ocular parameters derived from the use of IOLMaster700, CASIA2, and Pentacam exhibit significant discrepancies; as such, measurements from these devices should not be deemed as interchangeable.

2.
Front Pharmacol ; 14: 1242548, 2023.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38259276

RÉSUMÉ

Objective: To systematically evaluate the safety and efficacy of docetaxel plus S-1-based therapy in gastric cancer treatment. Methods: PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials on docetaxel plus S-1-based therapy in the treatment of gastric cancer from the establishment of the database to 1 September 2022. Relevant studies were included per pre-defined eligibility criteria, and two researchers independently screened and assessed the included literature using Review Manager v5. Outcome measures and statistics related with efficacy and safety profiles were extracted from the included studies, and Stata v15.1 was used for pooled analysis. Results: Objective response rate (odds ratio = 2.34, 95% CI = [1.32, 4.13], p = 0.003), relapse-free survival (HR = 0.68, 95% CI = [0.58, 0.79], p < 0.001), progression-free survival (HR = 0.81, 95% CI = [0.68, 0.96], p = 0.016), and overall survival (HR = 0.86, 95% CI = [0.79, 0.95], p = 0.002) of docetaxel plus S-1-based therapy (DS-based therapy) in gastric cancer treatment were better than those of the non-DS-based therapy. However, DS-based therapy was associated with increased risk of certain adverse drug effects, such as alopecia, leukopenia, and oral mucositis. Further studies are warranted to validate the efficacy superiority of DS-based versus non-DS-based regimens as per our trial sequential analysis findings. Conclusion: DS-based therapy significantly improves patients' clinical outcomes in gastric cancer, albeit at the cost of increased toxicity. Further RCTs are needed to confirm the efficacy superiority of DS-based regimens.

SÉLECTION CITATIONS
DÉTAIL DE RECHERCHE