Raphael Kilian, Erika Bonacci, Ruth Donner, Jan Lammer, Clara Rizzo, Emanuele Crincoli, Valentino De Ruvo, Gerald Schmidinger, Emilio Pedrotti, Giorgio Marchini
{"title":"聚焦羊膜提取物滴眼液：文献综述。","authors":"Raphael Kilian, Erika Bonacci, Ruth Donner, Jan Lammer, Clara Rizzo, Emanuele Crincoli, Valentino De Ruvo, Gerald Schmidinger, Emilio Pedrotti, Giorgio Marchini","doi":"10.1097/ICL.0000000000001136","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To review the literature focusing on the effectiveness of amniotic membrane extract eye drops (AMEDs) in the treatment of ocular surface diseases.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and CENTRAL databases were searched until March 4, 2024. Overall, we identified 1,121 studies, 26 of which were selected for a full-text review. Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed for clinical improvements, time to resolution of corneal staining, adverse events, and preparation methods. Strength of clinical data was graded according to the Oxford Center for Evidence-Based Medicine.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, AMED compounds were used in 296 eyes of 205 patients. Fifty-nine percent of eyes were treated for dry eye disease, 23% for an epithelial defect, and the rest (18%) for other corneal wound healing disorders. Three main types of eye drops preparation were described, that is, lyophilized, homogenized, and fresh AMED. Although the methods of outcome reporting were heterogeneous, all included studies showed various grades of improvement in both signs and symptoms. The overall incidence of ocular side effects was 2.3%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite the suboptimal quality of evidence, overall, the available literature suggests that AMED is a valuable tool in the treatment of ocular surface disorders.</p>","PeriodicalId":50457,"journal":{"name":"Eye & Contact Lens-Science and Clinical Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Spotlight on Amniotic Membrane Extract Eye Drops: A Review of the Literature.\",\"authors\":\"Raphael Kilian, Erika Bonacci, Ruth Donner, Jan Lammer, Clara Rizzo, Emanuele Crincoli, Valentino De Ruvo, Gerald Schmidinger, Emilio Pedrotti, Giorgio Marchini\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/ICL.0000000000001136\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To review the literature focusing on the effectiveness of amniotic membrane extract eye drops (AMEDs) in the treatment of ocular surface diseases.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and CENTRAL databases were searched until March 4, 2024. Overall, we identified 1,121 studies, 26 of which were selected for a full-text review. Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed for clinical improvements, time to resolution of corneal staining, adverse events, and preparation methods. Strength of clinical data was graded according to the Oxford Center for Evidence-Based Medicine.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, AMED compounds were used in 296 eyes of 205 patients. Fifty-nine percent of eyes were treated for dry eye disease, 23% for an epithelial defect, and the rest (18%) for other corneal wound healing disorders. Three main types of eye drops preparation were described, that is, lyophilized, homogenized, and fresh AMED. Although the methods of outcome reporting were heterogeneous, all included studies showed various grades of improvement in both signs and symptoms. The overall incidence of ocular side effects was 2.3%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite the suboptimal quality of evidence, overall, the available literature suggests that AMED is a valuable tool in the treatment of ocular surface disorders.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50457,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Eye & Contact Lens-Science and Clinical Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Eye & Contact Lens-Science and Clinical Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/ICL.0000000000001136\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eye & Contact Lens-Science and Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ICL.0000000000001136","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Spotlight on Amniotic Membrane Extract Eye Drops: A Review of the Literature.
Objective: To review the literature focusing on the effectiveness of amniotic membrane extract eye drops (AMEDs) in the treatment of ocular surface diseases.
Methods: PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and CENTRAL databases were searched until March 4, 2024. Overall, we identified 1,121 studies, 26 of which were selected for a full-text review. Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed for clinical improvements, time to resolution of corneal staining, adverse events, and preparation methods. Strength of clinical data was graded according to the Oxford Center for Evidence-Based Medicine.
Results: Overall, AMED compounds were used in 296 eyes of 205 patients. Fifty-nine percent of eyes were treated for dry eye disease, 23% for an epithelial defect, and the rest (18%) for other corneal wound healing disorders. Three main types of eye drops preparation were described, that is, lyophilized, homogenized, and fresh AMED. Although the methods of outcome reporting were heterogeneous, all included studies showed various grades of improvement in both signs and symptoms. The overall incidence of ocular side effects was 2.3%.
Conclusions: Despite the suboptimal quality of evidence, overall, the available literature suggests that AMED is a valuable tool in the treatment of ocular surface disorders.
期刊介绍：
Eye & Contact Lens: Science and Clinical Practice is the official journal of the Contact Lens Association of Ophthalmologists (CLAO), an international educational association for anterior segment research and clinical practice of interest to ophthalmologists, optometrists, and other vision care providers and researchers. Focusing especially on contact lenses, it also covers dry eye disease, MGD, infections, toxicity of drops and contact lens care solutions, topography, cornea surgery and post-operative care, optics, refractive surgery and corneal stability (eg, UV cross-linking). Peer-reviewed and published six times annually, it is a highly respected scientific journal in its field.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
