{"title":"伏立康唑治疗真菌性角膜炎的有效性:随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析","authors":"Yulia Aryati, Elfa Ali Idrus","doi":"10.24123/mpi.v4i2.5284","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n \nAntifungal intervention fails in approximately half of fungal keratitis patients, demonstrating its limitations. Voriconazole use for fungal keratitis has raised new interest because of its broad spectrum and good ocular penetration. However, its effectiveness has not been systematically evaluated. Here we try to clarify the benefits of voriconazole in fungal keratitis cases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing voriconazole to placebo or other antifungal medications for fungal keratitis were searched in several databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials, and WHO-ICTRP. The primary outcome that analyzed was best spectacle-corrected vision acuity (BSCVA). The secondary outcomes were treatment success, corneal perforation or need for therapeutic penetrating keratoplasty (TPK). From 621 records, nine studies were selected for analysis. The results were as follows: As an initial therapy, topical natamycin outperformed voriconazole in BSCVA (mean difference = 0.14; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.26; P =.03). Voriconazole also has a greater risk of corneal perforation or TPK than natamycin (RR=1.69; 95% CI 1.11 to 2.58; P=.02). As an adjuvant, there is no significant difference found in BSCVA, treatment success, event of corneal perforation, or need for TPK between voriconazole and the other antifungal agents (itraconazole, ketoconazole, amphotericin B, natamycin, and placebo). This study shows that voriconazole is less superior than natamycin in treating early infections of fungal keratitis. More RCTs with larger samples are needed to evaluate voriconazole's adjuvant efficacy. \n \n \n \n","PeriodicalId":18807,"journal":{"name":"MPI (Media Pharmaceutica Indonesiana)","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of Voriconazole in Treating Fungal Keratitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials\",\"authors\":\"Yulia Aryati, Elfa Ali Idrus\",\"doi\":\"10.24123/mpi.v4i2.5284\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n \\n \\nAntifungal intervention fails in approximately half of fungal keratitis patients, demonstrating its limitations. Voriconazole use for fungal keratitis has raised new interest because of its broad spectrum and good ocular penetration. However, its effectiveness has not been systematically evaluated. Here we try to clarify the benefits of voriconazole in fungal keratitis cases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing voriconazole to placebo or other antifungal medications for fungal keratitis were searched in several databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials, and WHO-ICTRP. The primary outcome that analyzed was best spectacle-corrected vision acuity (BSCVA). The secondary outcomes were treatment success, corneal perforation or need for therapeutic penetrating keratoplasty (TPK). From 621 records, nine studies were selected for analysis. The results were as follows: As an initial therapy, topical natamycin outperformed voriconazole in BSCVA (mean difference = 0.14; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.26; P =.03). Voriconazole also has a greater risk of corneal perforation or TPK than natamycin (RR=1.69; 95% CI 1.11 to 2.58; P=.02). As an adjuvant, there is no significant difference found in BSCVA, treatment success, event of corneal perforation, or need for TPK between voriconazole and the other antifungal agents (itraconazole, ketoconazole, amphotericin B, natamycin, and placebo). This study shows that voriconazole is less superior than natamycin in treating early infections of fungal keratitis. More RCTs with larger samples are needed to evaluate voriconazole's adjuvant efficacy. \\n \\n \\n \\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":18807,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"MPI (Media Pharmaceutica Indonesiana)\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"MPI (Media Pharmaceutica Indonesiana)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24123/mpi.v4i2.5284\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MPI (Media Pharmaceutica Indonesiana)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24123/mpi.v4i2.5284","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
抗真菌干预在大约一半的真菌性角膜炎患者中失败,表明其局限性。伏立康唑用于真菌性角膜炎引起了新的兴趣,因为它的广谱和良好的眼部穿透性。然而,其有效性尚未得到系统评价。在这里,我们试图阐明伏立康唑在真菌性角膜炎病例中的益处。在PubMed、Scopus、Cochrane Library、ClinicalTrials和WHO-ICTRP等多个数据库中检索了比较vorigo - nazole与安慰剂或其他抗真菌药物治疗真菌性角膜炎的随机对照试验(rct)。分析的主要结果是最佳眼镜矫正视力(BSCVA)。次要结果是治疗成功,角膜穿孔或需要治疗性穿透性角膜移植术(TPK)。从621项记录中,选择了9项研究进行分析。结果如下:作为初始治疗,局部纳他霉素治疗BSCVA的效果优于vori-conazole(平均差异= 0.14;95% CI 0.02 ~ 0.26;P = 03)。伏立康唑发生角膜穿孔或TPK的风险也高于纳他霉素(RR=1.69;95% CI 1.11 ~ 2.58;P = .02点)。作为辅助治疗,伏立康唑与其他抗真菌药物(伊曲康唑、酮康唑、两性霉素B、那他霉素和安慰剂)在BSCVA、治疗成功率、角膜穿孔事件或TPK需求方面无显著差异。本研究表明伏立康唑在治疗真菌性角膜炎早期感染方面不如那他霉素优越。评估伏立康唑的辅助疗效需要更多的大样本随机对照试验。
Effectiveness of Voriconazole in Treating Fungal Keratitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Antifungal intervention fails in approximately half of fungal keratitis patients, demonstrating its limitations. Voriconazole use for fungal keratitis has raised new interest because of its broad spectrum and good ocular penetration. However, its effectiveness has not been systematically evaluated. Here we try to clarify the benefits of voriconazole in fungal keratitis cases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing voriconazole to placebo or other antifungal medications for fungal keratitis were searched in several databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials, and WHO-ICTRP. The primary outcome that analyzed was best spectacle-corrected vision acuity (BSCVA). The secondary outcomes were treatment success, corneal perforation or need for therapeutic penetrating keratoplasty (TPK). From 621 records, nine studies were selected for analysis. The results were as follows: As an initial therapy, topical natamycin outperformed voriconazole in BSCVA (mean difference = 0.14; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.26; P =.03). Voriconazole also has a greater risk of corneal perforation or TPK than natamycin (RR=1.69; 95% CI 1.11 to 2.58; P=.02). As an adjuvant, there is no significant difference found in BSCVA, treatment success, event of corneal perforation, or need for TPK between voriconazole and the other antifungal agents (itraconazole, ketoconazole, amphotericin B, natamycin, and placebo). This study shows that voriconazole is less superior than natamycin in treating early infections of fungal keratitis. More RCTs with larger samples are needed to evaluate voriconazole's adjuvant efficacy.