Hashem Abu Serhan , Abdullah Ahmed , Mahrukh Chaudhry , Zain Ali Nadeem , Fakiha Ahmed , Usama Hussain Kamal , Ameen Alkhateeb , Ayman G. Elnahry
{"title":"近视牵引性黄斑病变的黄斑扣带疗法:全面系统回顾与元分析》。","authors":"Hashem Abu Serhan , Abdullah Ahmed , Mahrukh Chaudhry , Zain Ali Nadeem , Fakiha Ahmed , Usama Hussain Kamal , Ameen Alkhateeb , Ayman G. Elnahry","doi":"10.1016/j.ajo.2024.10.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Myopic traction maculopathy (MTM) is a major cause of visual impairment and blindness, particularly in Asian populations. With the global burden of myopia on the rise, understanding effective treatment options is crucial. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate the efficacy of macular buckling in the management of MTM.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>A systematic review and meta-analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases were searched for relevant studies up to July 2024. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies reporting outcomes of macular buckling for MTM. Primary outcomes included changes in best-corrected visual acuity and axial length, retinal reattachment rate, and macular hole closure rate. Random-effect models were used for statistical analysis, with heterogeneity assessed using the <em>I</em>² statistic. The pooled results were reported as mean difference or proportion with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each outcome.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Thirteen studies (482 eyes) met the inclusion criteria. Significant improvements in best-corrected visual acuity were observed across all follow-up periods, with the most substantial improvement in long-term outcomes (mean difference: 0.38 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution; 95% CI: 0.28-0.47). Axial length showed consistent reductions, with a mean long-term reduction of 2.88 mm (95% CI: 2.54-3.21). The pooled long-term retinal reattachment rate was 94% (95% CI: 86%-97%), while the long-term full thickness macular hole closure rate was 72% (95% CI: 55%-85%). Heterogeneity varied across outcomes and follow-up periods, ranging from low to high.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Macular buckling demonstrates promising outcomes for MTM, including improved visual acuity, reduced axial length, high retinal reattachment rates, and favorable macular hole closure rates. These findings support the efficacy of macular buckling as a treatment option for MTM. However, further standardized, long-term studies are needed to confirm these results and explore potential combination therapies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7568,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Macular Buckling for Myopic Traction Maculopathy: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Hashem Abu Serhan , Abdullah Ahmed , Mahrukh Chaudhry , Zain Ali Nadeem , Fakiha Ahmed , Usama Hussain Kamal , Ameen Alkhateeb , Ayman G. Elnahry\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ajo.2024.10.008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Myopic traction maculopathy (MTM) is a major cause of visual impairment and blindness, particularly in Asian populations. With the global burden of myopia on the rise, understanding effective treatment options is crucial. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate the efficacy of macular buckling in the management of MTM.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>A systematic review and meta-analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases were searched for relevant studies up to July 2024. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies reporting outcomes of macular buckling for MTM. Primary outcomes included changes in best-corrected visual acuity and axial length, retinal reattachment rate, and macular hole closure rate. Random-effect models were used for statistical analysis, with heterogeneity assessed using the <em>I</em>² statistic. The pooled results were reported as mean difference or proportion with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each outcome.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Thirteen studies (482 eyes) met the inclusion criteria. Significant improvements in best-corrected visual acuity were observed across all follow-up periods, with the most substantial improvement in long-term outcomes (mean difference: 0.38 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution; 95% CI: 0.28-0.47). Axial length showed consistent reductions, with a mean long-term reduction of 2.88 mm (95% CI: 2.54-3.21). The pooled long-term retinal reattachment rate was 94% (95% CI: 86%-97%), while the long-term full thickness macular hole closure rate was 72% (95% CI: 55%-85%). Heterogeneity varied across outcomes and follow-up periods, ranging from low to high.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Macular buckling demonstrates promising outcomes for MTM, including improved visual acuity, reduced axial length, high retinal reattachment rates, and favorable macular hole closure rates. These findings support the efficacy of macular buckling as a treatment option for MTM. However, further standardized, long-term studies are needed to confirm these results and explore potential combination therapies.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7568,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002939424004768\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002939424004768","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Macular Buckling for Myopic Traction Maculopathy: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Purpose
Myopic traction maculopathy (MTM) is a major cause of visual impairment and blindness, particularly in Asian populations. With the global burden of myopia on the rise, understanding effective treatment options is crucial. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate the efficacy of macular buckling in the management of MTM.
Design
A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Methods
A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases were searched for relevant studies up to July 2024. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies reporting outcomes of macular buckling for MTM. Primary outcomes included changes in best-corrected visual acuity and axial length, retinal reattachment rate, and macular hole closure rate. Random-effect models were used for statistical analysis, with heterogeneity assessed using the I² statistic. The pooled results were reported as mean difference or proportion with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each outcome.
Results
Thirteen studies (482 eyes) met the inclusion criteria. Significant improvements in best-corrected visual acuity were observed across all follow-up periods, with the most substantial improvement in long-term outcomes (mean difference: 0.38 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution; 95% CI: 0.28-0.47). Axial length showed consistent reductions, with a mean long-term reduction of 2.88 mm (95% CI: 2.54-3.21). The pooled long-term retinal reattachment rate was 94% (95% CI: 86%-97%), while the long-term full thickness macular hole closure rate was 72% (95% CI: 55%-85%). Heterogeneity varied across outcomes and follow-up periods, ranging from low to high.
Conclusions
Macular buckling demonstrates promising outcomes for MTM, including improved visual acuity, reduced axial length, high retinal reattachment rates, and favorable macular hole closure rates. These findings support the efficacy of macular buckling as a treatment option for MTM. However, further standardized, long-term studies are needed to confirm these results and explore potential combination therapies.
期刊介绍:
The American Journal of Ophthalmology is a peer-reviewed, scientific publication that welcomes the submission of original, previously unpublished manuscripts directed to ophthalmologists and visual science specialists describing clinical investigations, clinical observations, and clinically relevant laboratory investigations. Published monthly since 1884, the full text of the American Journal of Ophthalmology and supplementary material are also presented online at www.AJO.com and on ScienceDirect.
The American Journal of Ophthalmology publishes Full-Length Articles, Perspectives, Editorials, Correspondences, Books Reports and Announcements. Brief Reports and Case Reports are no longer published. We recommend submitting Brief Reports and Case Reports to our companion publication, the American Journal of Ophthalmology Case Reports.
Manuscripts are accepted with the understanding that they have not been and will not be published elsewhere substantially in any format, and that there are no ethical problems with the content or data collection. Authors may be requested to produce the data upon which the manuscript is based and to answer expeditiously any questions about the manuscript or its authors.