Bacillus-based probiotic cleansers reduce the formation of dry biofilms on common hospital surfaces.

In the absence of liquid suspension, dry biofilms can form upon hard surfaces within a hospital environment, representing a healthcare-associated infection risk. Probiotic cleansers using generally recognized as safe organisms, such as those of the Bacillus genus, represent a potential strategy for the reduction of dry biofilm bioburden. The mechanisms of action and efficacy of these cleaners are, however, poorly understood. To address this, a preventative dry biofilm assay was developed using steel, melamine, and ceramic surfaces to assess the ability of a commercially available Bacillus spp. based probiotic cleanser to reduce the surface bioburden of Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus. Via this assay, phosphate-buffered saline controls were able to generate dry biofilms within 7 days of incubation, with the application of the probiotic cleanser able to prevent >97.7% of dry biofilm formation across both pathogen analogs and surface types. Further to this, surfaces treated with the probiotic mixture alone also showed a reduction in dry biofilm across both pathogen and surface types. Confocal laser scanning microscopy imaging indicated that the probiotic bacteria were able to germinate and colonize surfaces, likely forming a protective layer upon these hard surfaces.

Toward Universal Eye Health Coverage-Key Outcomes of the World Health Organization Package of Eye Care Interventions: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Despite persistent inequalities in access to eye care services globally, guidance on a set of recommended, evidence-based eye care interventions to support country health care planning has not been available. To overcome this barrier, the World Health Organization (WHO) Package of Eye Care Interventions (PECI) has been developed. Objective: To describe the key outcomes of the PECI development. Evidence Review: A standardized stepwise approach that included the following stages: (1) selection of priority eye conditions by an expert panel after reviewing epidemiological evidence and health facility data; (2) identification of interventions and related evidence for the selected eye conditions from a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs); stage 2 included a systematic literature search, screening of title and abstracts (excluding articles that were not relevant CPGs), full-text review to assess disclosure of conflicts of interest and affiliations, quality appraisal, and data extraction; (3) expert review of the evidence extracted in stage 2, identification of missed interventions, and agreement on the inclusion of essential interventions suitable for implementation in low- and middle-income resource settings; and (4) peer review. Findings: Fifteen priority eye conditions were chosen. The literature search identified 3601 articles. Of these, 469 passed title and abstract screening, 151 passed full-text screening, 98 passed quality appraisal, and 87 were selected for data extraction. Little evidence (≤1 CPG identified) was available for pterygium, keratoconus, congenital eyelid disorders, vision rehabilitation, myopic macular degeneration, ptosis, entropion, and ectropion. In stage 3, domain-specific expert groups voted to include 135 interventions (57%) of a potential 235 interventions collated from stage 2. After synthesis across all interventions and eye conditions, 64 interventions (13 health promotion and education, 6 screening and prevention, 38 treatment, and 7 rehabilitation) were included in the PECI. Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review of CPGs for priority eye conditions, followed by an expert consensus procedure, identified 64 essential, evidence-based, eye care interventions that are required to achieve universal eye health coverage. The review identified some important gaps, including a paucity of high-quality, English-language CPGs, for several eye diseases and a dearth of evidence-based recommendations on eye health promotion and prevention within existing CPGs.

Laser trabeculoplasty for open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Open-angle glaucoma (OAG) is an important cause of blindness worldwide. Laser trabeculoplasty, a treatment modality, still does not have a clear position in the treatment sequence. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of laser trabeculoplasty for treating OAG and ocular hypertension (OHT) when compared to medication, glaucoma surgery or no intervention. We also wished to compare the effectiveness of different laser trabeculoplasty technologies for treating OAG and OHT. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2021, Issue 10); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; the ISRCTN registry; LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP. The date of the search was 28 October 2021. We also contacted researchers in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing laser trabeculoplasty with no intervention, with medical treatment, or with surgery in people with OAG or OHT. We also included trials comparing different types of laser trabeculoplasty technologies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methods expected by Cochrane. Two authors screened search results and extracted data independently. We considered the following outcomes at 24 months: failure to control intraocular pressure (IOP), failure to stabilise visual field progression, failure to stabilise optic neuropathy progression, adverse effects, quality of life, and costs. We graded the 'certainty' of the evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included 40 studies (5613 eyes of 4028 people) in this review. The majority of the studies were conducted in Europe and in the USA. Most of the studies were at risk of performance and/or detection bias as they were unmasked. None of the studies were judged as having low risk of bias for all domains. We did not identify any studies of laser trabeculoplasty alone versus no intervention. Laser trabeculoplasty versus medication Fourteen studies compared laser trabeculoplasty with medication in either people with primary OAG (7 studies) or primary or secondary OAG (7 studies); five of the 14 studies also included participants with OHT. Six studies used argon laser trabeculoplasty and eight studies used selective laser trabeculoplasty. There was considerable clinical and methodological diversity in these studies leading to statistical heterogeneity in results for the primary outcome "failure to control IOP" at 24 months.  Risk ratios (RRs) ranged from 0.43 in favour of laser trabeculoplasty to 1.87 in favour of medication (5 studies, I2 = 89%). Studies of argon laser compared with medication were more likely to show a beneficial effect compared with studies of selective laser (test for interaction P = 0.0001) but the argon laser studies were older and the medication comparator group in those studies may have been less effective. We considered this to be low-certainty evidence because the trials were at risk of bias (they were not masked) and there was unexplained heterogeneity. There was evidence from two studies (624 eyes) that argon laser treatment was associated with less failure to stabilise visual field progression compared with medication (7% versus 11%, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.16) at 24 months and one further large recent study of selective laser also reported a reduced risk of failure at 48 months (17% versus 26%) RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.81, 1178 eyes). We judged this outcome as moderate-certainty evidence, downgrading for risk of bias. There was only very low-certainty evidence on optic neuropathy progression. Adverse effects were more commonly seen in the laser trabeculoplasty group including peripheral anterior synechiae (PAS) associated with argon laser (32% versus 26%, RR 11.74, 95% CI 5.94 to 23.22; 624 eyes; 2 RCTs; low-certainty evidence); 5% of participants treated with laser in three studies of selective laser group had early IOP spikes (moderate-certainty evidence). One UK-based study provided moderate-certainty evidence that laser trabeculoplasty was more cost-effective.  Laser trabeculoplasty versus trabeculectomy Three studies compared laser trabeculoplasty with trabeculectomy. All three studies enrolled participants with OAG (primary or secondary) and used argon laser. People receiving laser trabeculoplasty may have a higher risk of uncontrolled IOP at 24 months compared with people receiving trabeculectomy (16% versus 8%, RR 2.12, 95% CI 1.44 to 3.11; 901 eyes; 2 RCTs). We judged this to be low-certainty evidence because of risk of bias (trials were not masked) and there was inconsistency between the two trials (I2 = 68%). There was limited evidence on visual field progression suggesting a higher risk of failure with laser trabeculoplasty. There was no information on optic neuropathy progression, quality of life or costs. PAS formation and IOP spikes were not reported but in one study trabeculectomy was associated with an increased risk of cataract (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.46 to 2.16) (very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Laser trabeculoplasty may work better than topical medication in slowing down the progression of open-angle glaucoma (rate of visual field loss) and may be similar to modern eye drops in controlling eye pressure at a lower cost. It is not associated with serious unwanted effects, particularly for the newer types of trabeculoplasty, such as selective laser trabeculoplasty.

Grand Challenges in global eye health: a global prioritisation process using Delphi method.

BACKGROUND: We undertook a Grand Challenges in Global Eye Health prioritisation exercise to identify the key issues that must be addressed to improve eye health in the context of an ageing population, to eliminate persistent inequities in health-care access, and to mitigate widespread resource limitations. METHODS: Drawing on methods used in previous Grand Challenges studies, we used a multi-step recruitment strategy to assemble a diverse panel of individuals from a range of disciplines relevant to global eye health from all regions globally to participate in a three-round, online, Delphi-like, prioritisation process to nominate and rank challenges in global eye health. Through this process, we developed both global and regional priority lists. FINDINGS: Between Sept 1 and Dec 12, 2019, 470 individuals complete round 1 of the process, of whom 336 completed all three rounds (round 2 between Feb 26 and March 18, 2020, and round 3 between April 2 and April 25, 2020) 156 (46%) of 336 were women, 180 (54%) were men. The proportion of participants who worked in each region ranged from 104 (31%) in sub-Saharan Africa to 21 (6%) in central Europe, eastern Europe, and in central Asia. Of 85 unique challenges identified after round 1, 16 challenges were prioritised at the global level; six focused on detection and treatment of conditions (cataract, refractive error, glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, services for children and screening for early detection), two focused on addressing shortages in human resource capacity, five on other health service and policy factors (including strengthening policies, integration, health information systems, and budget allocation), and three on improving access to care and promoting equity. INTERPRETATION: This list of Grand Challenges serves as a starting point for immediate action by funders to guide investment in research and innovation in eye health. It challenges researchers, clinicians, and policy makers to build collaborations to address specific challenges. FUNDING: The Queen Elizabeth Diamond Jubilee Trust, Moorfields Eye Charity, National Institute for Health Research Moorfields Biomedical Research Centre, Wellcome Trust, Sightsavers, The Fred Hollows Foundation, The Seva Foundation, British Council for the Prevention of Blindness, and Christian Blind Mission. TRANSLATIONS: For the French, Spanish, Chinese, Portuguese, Arabic and Persian translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgical Techniques for Open-Angle Glaucoma: An Overview of Cochrane Systematic Reviews and Network Meta-analysis.

IMPORTANCE: Glaucoma affects more than 75 million people worldwide. Intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering surgery is an important treatment for this disease. Interest in reducing surgical morbidity has led to the introduction of minimally invasive glaucoma surgeries (MIGS). Understanding the comparative effectiveness and safety of MIGS is necessary for clinicians and patients. OBJECTIVE: To summarize data from randomized clinical trials of MIGS for open-angle glaucoma, which were evaluated in a suite of Cochrane reviews. DATA SOURCES: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews including studies published before June 1, 2021. STUDY SELECTION: Reviews of randomized clinical trials comparing MIGS with cataract extraction alone, other MIGS, traditional glaucoma surgery, laser trabeculoplasty, or medical therapy. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines by one investigator and confirmed by a second. Methodologic rigor was assessed using the AMSTAR 2 appraisal tool and random-effects network meta-analyses were conducted. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The proportion of participants who did not need to use medication to reduce intraocular pressure (IOP) postsurgery (drop-free). Outcomes were analyzed at short-term (<6 months), medium-term (6-18 months), and long-term (>18 months) follow-up. RESULTS: Six eligible Cochrane reviews were identified discussing trabecular bypass with iStent or Hydrus microstents, ab interno trabeculotomy with Trabectome, subconjunctival and supraciliary drainage devices, and endoscopic cyclophotocoagulation. Moderate certainty evidence indicated that adding a Hydrus safely improved the likelihood of drop-free glaucoma control at medium-term (relative risk [RR], 1.6; 95% CI, 1.4 to 1.8) and long-term (RR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.4 to 1.9) follow-up and conferred 2.0-mm Hg (95% CI, -2.7 to -1.3 mm Hg) greater IOP reduction at long-term follow-up, compared with cataract surgery alone. Adding an iStent also safely improved drop-free disease control compared with cataract surgery alone (RR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.6), but the short-term IOP-lowering effect of the iStent was not sustained. Addition of a CyPass microstent improved drop-free glaucoma control compared with cataract surgery alone (RR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.5) but was associated with an increased risk of vraision loss. Network meta-analyses supported the direction and magnitude of these results. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Based on data synthesized in Cochrane reviews, some MIGS may afford patients with glaucoma greater drop-free disease control than cataract surgery alone. Among the products currently available, randomized clinical trial data associate the Hydrus with greater drop-free glaucoma control and IOP lowering than the iStent; however, these effect sizes were small.

Hydrogenotrophic Methanogenesis Under Alkaline Conditions.

A cement-based geological disposal facility (GDF) is one potential option for the disposal of intermediate level radioactive wastes. The presence of both organic and metallic materials within a GDF provides the opportunity for both acetoclastic and hydrogenotrophic methanogenesis. However, for these processes to proceed, they need to adapt to the alkaline environment generated by the cementitious materials employed in backfilling and construction. Within the present study, a range of alkaline and neutral pH sediments were investigated to determine the upper pH limit and the preferred route of methane generation. In all cases, the acetoclastic route did not proceed above pH 9.0, and the hydrogenotrophic route dominated methane generation under alkaline conditions. In some alkaline sediments, acetate metabolism was coupled to hydrogenotrophic methanogenesis via syntrophic acetate oxidation, which was confirmed through inhibition studies employing fluoromethane. The absence of acetoclastic methanogenesis at alkaline pH values (>pH 9.0) is attributed to the dominance of the acetate anion over the uncharged, undissociated acid. Under these conditions, acetoclastic methanogens require an active transport system to access their substrate. The data indicate that hydrogenotrophic methanogenesis is the dominant methanogenic pathway under alkaline conditions (>pH 9.0).

Strengthening the integration of eye care into the health system: methodology for the development of the WHO package of eye care interventions.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the rational for, and the methods that will be employed to develop, the WHO package of eye care interventions (PECI). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The development of the package will be conducted in four steps: (1) selection of eye conditions (for which interventions will be included in the package) based on epidemiological data on the causes of vision impairment and blindness, prevalence estimates of eye conditions and health facility data; (2) identification of interventions and related evidence for the selected eye conditions from clinical practice guidelines and high-quality systematic reviews by a technical working group; (3) expert agreement on the inclusion of eye care interventions in the package and the description of resources required for the provision of the selected interventions; and (4) peer review. The project will be led by the WHO Vision Programme in collaboration with Cochrane Eyes and Vision. A Technical Advisory Group, comprised of public health and clinical experts in the field, will provide technical input throughout all stages of development. RESULTS: After considering the feedback of Technical Advisory Group members and reviewing-related evidence, a final list of eye conditions for which interventions will be included in the package has been collated. CONCLUSION: The PECI will support Ministries of Health in prioritising, planning, budgeting and integrating eye care interventions into health systems. It is anticipated that the PECI will be available for use in 2021.

Efficacy of Repeat Selective Laser Trabeculoplasty in Medication-Naive Open-Angle Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension during the LiGHT Trial.

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of repeat selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) in medication-naive open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and ocular hypertensive (OHT) patients requiring repeat treatment for early to medium-term failure during the Laser in Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension (LiGHT) trial. DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of SLT treatment arm of a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Treatment-naive OAG or OHT requiring repeat 360-degree SLT within 18 months. Retreatment was triggered by predefined IOP and disease-progression criteria (using objective individualized target IOPs). METHODS: After SLT at baseline, patients were followed for a minimum of 18 months after second (repeat) SLT. A mixed-model analysis was performed with the eye as the unit of analysis, with crossed random effects to adjust for correlation between fellow eyes and repeated measures within eyes. Kaplan-Meier curves plot the duration of effect. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Initial (early) IOP lowering at 2 months and duration of effect after initial and repeat SLT. RESULTS: A total of 115 eyes of 90 patients received repeat SLT during the first 18 months of the trial. Pretreatment IOP before initial SLT was significantly higher than before retreatment IOP of repeat SLT (mean difference, 3.4 mmHg; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6-4.3 mmHg; P < 0.001). Absolute IOP reduction at 2 months was greater after initial SLT compared with repeat SLT (mean difference, 1.0 mmHg; 95% CI, 0.2-1.8 mmHg; P = 0.02). Adjusted absolute IOP reduction at 2 months (adjusting for IOP before initial or repeat laser) was greater after repeat SLT (adjusted mean difference, -1.1 mmHg, 95% CI, -1.7 to -0.5 mmHg; P = 0.001). A total of 34 eyes were early failures (retreatment 2 months after initial SLT) versus 81 later failures (retreatment >2 months after initial SLT). No significant difference in early absolute IOP reduction at 2 months after repeat SLT was noted between early and later failures (mean difference, 0.3 mmHg; 95% CI, -1.1 to 1.8 mmHg; P = 0.655). Repeat SLT maintained drop-free IOP control in 67% of 115 eyes at 18 months, with no clinically relevant adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: These exploratory analyses demonstrate that repeat SLT can maintain IOP at or below target IOP in medication-naive OAG and OHT eyes requiring retreatment with at least an equivalent duration of effect to initial laser.

Systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials on open angle glaucoma.

Evidence for the effectiveness of interventions to prevent the progression of optic nerve damage in open angle glaucoma has evolved over the last 25 years. We describe that evolution through the systematic reviews on various aspects of the topic and how those reviews have highlighted the need for new trials. Though we can be confident that lowering pressure does indeed reduce the risk of progression, we still lack good evidence on the comparative effectiveness of different treatments not so much on lowering pressure but on preventing progression of the disease. This is true for different medicines, types of laser and especially for different surgical interventions. As always there is a need for more research, but this needs to be focussed on key uncertainties using core outcome sets which avoid research waste. Ultimately, our guidelines can be based on sound and comprehensive evidence of effectiveness.

Selective laser trabeculoplasty versus drops for newly diagnosed ocular hypertension and glaucoma: the LiGHT RCT.

BACKGROUND: Newly diagnosed open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and ocular hypertension (OHT) are habitually treated with intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering eyedrops. Selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) is a safe alternative to drops and is rarely used as first-line treatment. OBJECTIVES: To compare health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in newly diagnosed, treatment-naive patients with OAG or OHT, treated with two treatment pathways: topical IOP-lowering medication from the outset (Medicine-1st) or primary SLT followed by topical medications as required (Laser-1st). We also compared the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the two pathways. DESIGN: A 36-month pragmatic, unmasked, multicentre randomised controlled trial. SETTINGS: Six collaborating specialist glaucoma clinics across the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Newly diagnosed patients with OAG or OHT in one or both eyes who were aged ≥ 18 years and able to provide informed consent and read and understand English. Patients needed to qualify for treatment, be able to perform a reliable visual field (VF) test and have visual acuity of at least 6 out of 36 in the study eye. Patients with VF loss mean deviation worse than -12 dB in the better eye or -15 dB in the worse eye were excluded. Patients were also excluded if they had congenital, early childhood or secondary glaucoma or ocular comorbidities; if they had any previous ocular surgery except phacoemulsification, at least 1 year prior to recruitment or any active treatment for ophthalmic conditions; if they were pregnant; or if they were unable to use topical medical therapy or had contraindications to SLT. INTERVENTIONS: SLT according to a predefined protocol compared with IOP-lowering eyedrops, as per national guidelines. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was HRQoL at 3 years [as measured using the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire]. Secondary outcomes were cost and cost-effectiveness, disease-specific HRQoL, clinical effectiveness and safety. RESULTS: Of the 718 patients enrolled, 356 were randomised to Laser-1st (initial SLT followed by routine medical treatment) and 362 to Medicine-1st (routine medical treatment only). A total of 652 (91%) patients returned the primary outcome questionnaire at 36 months. The EQ-5D-5L score was not significantly different between the two arms [adjusted mean difference (Laser-1st - Medicine-1st) 0.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.01 to 0.03; p = 0.23] at 36 months. Over 36 months, the proportion of visits at which IOP was within the target range was higher in the Laser-1st arm (93.0%, 95% CI 91.9% to 94.0%) than in the Medicine-1st arm (91.3%, 95% CI 89.9% to 92.5%), with IOP-lowering glaucoma surgery required in 0 and 11 patients, respectively. There was a 97% probability of Laser-1st being more cost-effective than Medicine-1st for the NHS, at a willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life-year of £20,000, with a reduction in ophthalmology costs of £458 per patient (95% of bootstrap iterations between -£585 and -£345). LIMITATION: An unmasked design, although a limitation, was essential to capture any treatment effects on patients' perception. The EQ-5D-5L questionnaire is a generic tool used in multiple settings and may not have been the most sensitive tool to investigate HRQoL. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with medication, SLT provided a stable, drop-free IOP control to 74.2% of patients for at least 3 years, with a reduced need for surgery, lower cost and comparable HRQoL. Based on the evidence, SLT seems to be the most cost-effective first-line treatment option for OAG and OHT, also providing better clinical outcomes. FUTURE WORK: Longitudinal research into the clinical efficacy of SLT as a first-line treatment will specify the long-term differences of disease progression, treatment intensity and ocular surgery rates between the two pathways. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN32038223. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 31. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Glaucoma is an eye condition in which the optic nerve becomes damaged and, if left untreated, will lead to loss of vision. Ocular hypertension (OHT) is the medical name for high pressure in the eye that increases the risk of getting glaucoma. Lowering the eye pressure is the only known way to prevent glaucoma from getting worse. Before this trial, the standard initial treatment of these conditions was the prescription of eyedrops to lower the pressure in the eye. An alternative is a laser therapy that is known to reduce the eye pressure. This study investigated if starting treatment of glaucoma or OHT with laser therapy (using eyedrops later, if needed) affected the patients' quality of life (QoL) more or less than starting treatment with eyedrops alone. The study also investigated if initial treatment with laser and initial treatment with eyedrops are equally good at controlling eye pressure and are equally safe and how much they cost the NHS. Patients were randomly assigned to starting treatment with either laser or eyedrops and the two groups were then compared. The study found that for the first 3 years QoL was similar regardless of treatment. However, three-quarters of patients initially treated with laser did not need any eyedrops to control their eye pressure for 3 years. Patients initially treated with laser were less likely to require cataract surgery, and none needed any glaucoma surgery in the first 3 years. In contrast, among those patients treated with eyedrops, glaucoma surgery was required in 11 eyes (out of 622 eyes). Initial treatment with laser was cheaper than initial treatment with eyedrops. The results of this study suggest that laser is an efficient, safe and cheaper alternative to eyedrops, and that three-quarters of the patients initially treated with laser do not need any eyedrops for the first 3 years of treatment.

Primary Selective Laser Trabeculoplasty for Open-Angle Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension: Clinical Outcomes, Predictors of Success, and Safety from the Laser in Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension Trial.

PURPOSE: To report clinical efficacy, predictors of success, and safety of primary selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) used in treatment-naive patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) or ocular hypertension (OHT). DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Treatment-naive patients with OAG or OHT. METHODS: Patients randomized to SLT or topical medication and treated to predefined target intraocular pressures (IOPs) requiring ≥20% IOP reduction from baseline for all disease severity levels. OUTCOME MEASURES: Initial (early) absolute IOP-lowering at 2 months. Achievement of drop-free disease-control: meeting target IOP without disease progression or need for additional topical medication over 36 months after SLT. Predictors of early absolute IOP-lowering and drop-free disease-control after single initial SLT. Frequency of laser-related complications. RESULTS: A total of 611 eyes (195 OHT and 416 OAG) of 355 patients received SLT, and 622 eyes (185 OHT and 437 OAG) of 362 patients received topical medication at baseline. Early absolute IOP-lowering after SLT was no different between OHT and OAG eyes (adjusted mean difference = -0.05 mmHg; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.6 to 0.5 mmHg; P = 0.85). No difference was noted in early absolute IOP-lowering between topical medication and primary SLT (adjusted mean difference = -0.1 mmHg; 95% CI, -0.6 to 0.4 mmHg; P = 0.67). Early absolute IOP-lowering with primary SLT was positively associated with baseline IOP (coefficient 0.58; 95% CI, 0.53-0.63; P < 0.001) and negatively with female gender (coefficient -0.63; 95% CI, -1.23 to -0.02; P = 0.04). At 36 months, 536 eyes (87.7% of 611 eyes) of 314 patients (88.5% of 355 patients) were available for analysis. Some 74.6% of eyes (400 eyes) treated with primary SLT achieved drop-free disease-control at 36 months; 58.2% (312 eyes) after single SLT. Total SLT power and 2-month IOP were predictors of drop-free disease-control at 36 months after single SLT. Six eyes of 6 patients experienced immediate post-laser IOP spike (>5 mmHg from pretreatment IOP) with 1 eye requiring treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Primary SLT achieved comparable early absolute IOP-lowering in OHT versus OAG eyes. Drop-free disease-control was achieved in approximately 75% eyes at 36 months after 1 or 2 SLTs, the majority of these after single SLT. These analyses are exploratory but support primary SLT to be effective and safe in treatment-naive OAG and OHT eyes.

Selective laser trabeculoplasty versus eye drops for first-line treatment of ocular hypertension and glaucoma (LiGHT): a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Primary open angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension are habitually treated with eye drops that lower intraocular pressure. Selective laser trabeculoplasty is a safe alternative but is rarely used as first-line treatment. We compared the two. METHODS: In this observer-masked, randomised controlled trial treatment-naive patients with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension and no ocular comorbidities were recruited between 2012 and 2014 at six UK hospitals. They were randomly allocated (web-based randomisation) to initial selective laser trabeculoplasty or to eye drops. An objective target intraocular pressure was set according to glaucoma severity. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at 3 years (assessed by EQ-5D). Secondary outcomes were cost and cost-effectiveness, disease-specific HRQoL, clinical effectiveness, and safety. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered at controlled-trials.com (ISRCTN32038223). FINDINGS: Of 718 patients enrolled, 356 were randomised to the selective laser trabeculoplasty and 362 to the eye drops group. 652 (91%) returned the primary outcome questionnaire at 36 months. Average EQ-5D score was 0·89 (SD 0·18) in the selective laser trabeculoplasty group versus 0·90 (SD 0·16) in the eye drops group, with no significant difference (difference 0·01, 95% CI -0·01 to 0·03; p=0·23). At 36 months, 74·2% (95% CI 69·3-78·6) of patients in the selective laser trabeculoplasty group required no drops to maintain intraocular pressure at target. Eyes of patients in the selective laser trabeculoplasty group were within target intracoluar pressure at more visits (93·0%) than in the eye drops group (91·3%), with glaucoma surgery to lower intraocular pressure required in none versus 11 patients. Over 36 months, from an ophthalmology cost perspective, there was a 97% probability of selective laser trabeculoplasty as first treatment being more cost-effective than eye drops first at a willingness to pay of £20 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. INTERPRETATION: Selective laser trabeculoplasty should be offered as a first-line treatment for open angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension, supporting a change in clinical practice. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research, Health and Technology Assessment Programme.

Analysis of a Systematic Review About Blue Light-Filtering Intraocular Lenses for Retinal Protection: Understanding the Limitations of the Evidence.

Importance: Cataract surgery, with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation, is the most common ocular surgical procedure worldwide. It has been suggested that IOLs that selectively attenuate short wavelength visible light (blue light-filtering IOLs) may be beneficial for macular health. Whether blue light-filtering IOLs impart retinal photoprotection is of public health relevance, particularly in the context of aging demographics and the increasing global prevalence of age-related macular degeneration. This review analyzes and interprets the key findings, including consideration of the implications for practice and future research, of a 2018 Cochrane systematic review that evaluated the efficacy and safety of blue light-filtering IOLs for providing protection to macular health and function. Observations: The Cochrane systematic review included 51 randomized controlled trials that were performed in 17 countries. The trials involved adults undergoing cataract surgery in which a blue light-filtering IOL was compared with an equivalent non-blue light-filtering IOL. Study follow-up periods ranged from 1 month to 5 years. Together, these studies considered clinical outcomes in more than 5000 eyes. There was limited ability to combine data across trials (to draw overall conclusions) because of the use of different measurement techniques for outcomes, incomplete reporting of data, and/or varied follow-up periods. We identified substantial shortcomings in the internal validity of many of the included studies, particularly regarding trial design, conduct, and reporting. We propose several avenues for improving the rigor of potential future research in the field, including developing a core set of outcome measures, the inclusion of sample size calculations, the masking of trial participants and outcome assessors, and prospective clinical trial registration. Conclusions and Relevance: Using blue light-filtering IOLs to impart benefits to the macula is currently not supported by the best available clinical research evidence, and it is important that clinicians are mindful of this evidence limitation when adopting these devices in clinical practice.

Cochrane Eyes and Vision: a perspective introducing Cochrane Corner in Eye.

In 1972, Archie Cochrane wrote "It is surely a great criticism of our profession that we have not organised a critical summary, by specialty or subspecialty, adapted periodically, of all relevant randomised controlled trials". The Cochrane Collaboration arose in response to Archie Cochrane's challenge. Cochrane Eyes and Vision aims to prepare and promote access to systematic reviews of interventions for preventing or treating eye conditions and/or visual impairment, and helping people adjust to visual impairment or blindness. To identify all relevant randomised controlled trials, Cochrane Eyes and Vision has a team of information specialists who develop search strategies to identify studies for inclusion in Cochrane reviews. Since 1997 we have published 266 protocols, 193 new reviews and 158 updated reviews. The majority of these are reviews of intervention effectiveness; three reviews are diagnostic test accuracy reviews. Overall 18% of reviews contain no trials, highlighting a potential evidence gap. We provide training, education and guidance to systematic review authors and work with clinical and patient partners to prioritise and disseminate reviews. In addition, Cochrane Eyes and Vision US satellite carries out critical methodologic research addressing topics relevant to producing high-quality reviews. We are partnering with the journal Eye to publish commentaries on selected Cochrane systematic review findings. This partnership will allow us to make high-quality evidence available to ophthalmologists and other practitioners, researchers, policy makers and patients.

Prevalence and Causes of Visual Loss Among the Indigenous Peoples of the World: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Studies have documented a higher disease burden in indigenous compared with nonindigenous populations, but no global data on the epidemiology of visual loss in indigenous peoples are available. A systematic review of literature on visual loss in the world's indigenous populations could identify major gaps and inform interventions to reduce their burden of visual loss. Objective: To conduct a systematic review on the prevalence and causes of visual loss among the world's indigenous populations. Evidence Review: A search of databases and alternative sources identified literature on the prevalence and causes of visual loss (visual impairment and blindness) and eye diseases in indigenous populations. Studies from January 1, 1990, through August 1, 2017, that included clinical eye examinations of indigenous participants and, where possible, compared findings with those of nonindigenous populations were included. Methodologic quality of studies was evaluated to reveal gaps in the literature. Findings: Limited data were available worldwide. A total of 85 articles described 64 unique studies from 24 countries that examined 79 598 unique indigenous participants. Nineteen studies reported comparator data on 42 085 nonindigenous individuals. The prevalence of visual loss was reported in 13 countries, with visual impairment ranging from 0.6% in indigenous Australian children to 48.5% in native Tibetans 50 years or older. Uncorrected refractive error was the main cause of visual impairment (21.0%-65.1%) in 5 of 6 studies that measured presenting visual acuity. Cataract was the main cause of visual impairment in all 6 studies measuring best-corrected acuity (25.4%-72.2%). Cataract was the leading cause of blindness in 13 studies (32.0%-79.2%), followed by uncorrected refractive error in 2 studies (33.0% and 35.8%). Conclusions and Relevance: Most countries with indigenous peoples do not have data on the burden of visual loss in these populations. Although existing studies vary in methodologic quality and reliability, they suggest that most visual loss in indigenous populations is avoidable. Improvements in quality and frequency of research into the eye health of indigenous communities appear to be required, and coordinated eye care programs should be implemented to specifically target the indigenous peoples of the world.

Vision loss in Indigenous peoples of the world: a systematic review protocol.

REVIEW OBJECTIVE/QUESTION: The objectives of this review are.

Laser in Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension (LiGHT) trial. A multicentre, randomised controlled trial: design and methodology.

PURPOSE: The Laser in Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension (LiGHT) Trial aims to establish whether initial treatment with selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) is superior to initial treatment with topical medication for primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) or ocular hypertension (OHT). DESIGN: The LiGHT Trial is a prospective, unmasked, multicentre, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial. 718 previously untreated patients with POAG or OHT were recruited at six collaborating centres in the UK between 2012 and 2014. The trial comprises two treatment arms: initial SLT followed by conventional medical therapy as required, and medical therapy without laser therapy. Randomisation was provided online by a web-based randomisation service. Participants will be monitored for 3 years, according to routine clinical practice. The target intraocular pressure (IOP) was set at baseline according to an algorithm, based on disease severity and lifetime risk of loss of vision at recruitment, and subsequently adjusted on the basis of IOP control, optic disc and visual field. The primary outcome measure is health-related quality of life (HRQL) (EQ-5D five-level). Secondary outcomes are treatment pathway cost and cost-effectiveness, Glaucoma Utility Index, Glaucoma Symptom Scale, Glaucoma Quality of Life, objective measures of pathway effectiveness, visual function and safety profiles and concordance. A single main analysis will be performed at the end of the trial on an intention-to-treat basis. CONCLUSIONS: The LiGHT Trial is a multicentre, pragmatic, randomised clinical trial that will provide valuable data on the relative HRQL, clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of SLT and topical IOP-lowering medication. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN32038223, Pre-results.