BACKGROUND: Retinopathy of Prematurity (ROP) is one of the most common causes of childhood blindness worldwide. Comparisons of anti-VEGF and laser treatments in ROP are relatively lacking, and the data are scattered and limited. The objective of this meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of both treatments in type-1 and threshold ROP.
METHODS: A comprehensive literature search on ROP treatment was conducted using PubMed and Embase up to March 2017 in all languages. Major evaluation indexes were extracted from the included studies by two authors. The fixed-effects and random-effects models were used to measure the pooled estimates. The test of heterogeneity was performed using the Q statistic.
RESULTS: Ten studies were included in this meta-analysis. Retreatment incidence was significantly increased for anti-VEGF (OR 2.52; 95% CI 1.37 to 4.66; P = 0.003) compared to the laser treatment, while the incidences of eye complications (OR 0.29; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.82; P = 0.02) and myopia were significantly decreased with anti-VEGF compared to the laser treatment. However, there was no difference in the recurrence incidence (OR 1.86; 95% CI 0.37 to 9.40; P = 0.45) and time between treatment and retreatment (WMD 7.54 weeks; 95% CI 2.00 to 17.08; P = 0.12).
CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis indicates that laser treatment may be more efficacious than anti-VEGF treatment. However, the results of this meta-analysis also suggest that laser treatment may cause more eye complications and increase myopia. Large-scale prospective RCTs should be performed to assess the efficacy and safety of anti-VEGF versus laser treatment in the future.
PURPOSE: To review the available evidence on the ocular safety and efficacy of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents for the treatment of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) compared with laser photocoagulation therapy.
METHODS: A literature search of the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases was conducted last on September 6, 2016, with no date restrictions and limited to articles published in English. This search yielded 311 citations, of which 37 were deemed clinically relevant for full-text review. Thirteen of these were selected for inclusion in this assessment. The panel methodologist assigned ratings to the selected articles according to the level of evidence.
RESULTS: Of the 13 citations, 6 articles on 5 randomized clinical trials provided level II evidence supporting the use of anti-VEGF agents, either as monotherapy or in combination with laser therapy. The primary outcome for these articles included recurrence of ROP and the need for retreatment (3 articles), retinal structure (2 articles), and refractive outcome (1 article). Seven articles were comparative case series that provided level III evidence. The primary outcomes included the effects of anti-VEGF treatment on development of peripheral retinal vessels (1 article), refractive outcomes (1 article), or both structural and refractive or visual outcomes (5 articles).
CONCLUSIONS: Current level II and III evidence indicates that intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy is as effective as laser photocoagulation for achieving regression of acute ROP. Although there are distinct ocular advantages to anti-VEGF pharmacotherapy for some cases (such as eyes with zone I disease or aggressive posterior ROP), the disadvantages are that the ROP recurrence rate is higher, and vigilant and extended follow-up is needed because retinal vascularization is usually incomplete. After intravitreal injection, bevacizumab can be detected in serum within 1 day, and serum VEGF levels are suppressed for at least 8 to 12 weeks. The effects of lowering systemic VEGF levels on the developing organ systems of premature infants are unknown, and there are limited long-term data on potential systemic and neurodevelopmental effects after anti-VEGF use for ROP treatment. Anti-VEGF agents should be used judiciously and with awareness of the known and unknown or potential side effects.
A growing body of evidence indicates that antivascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy is effective in the treatment of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). We conducted a comprehensive literature review on refractive outcomes of anti-VEGF treatments compared to laser treatment or a combination of laser therapy and anti-VEGF injections. Of the 9 studies analyzed, the final mean refractive error was myopic in 3 studies (37%) with IVB monotherapy, 7 studies (87.5%) with laser photocoagulation, and 1 study (50%) with combined therapy. In comparing IVB with laser monotherapy, 6 of 7 studies (86%) reported that final refractive error was significantly more myopic (>1 D) after laser treatment. No study was graded as high quality, and only a single article provided moderate quality of evidence.
INTRODUCTION: Laser photocoagulation is the current gold standard treatment for proliferative retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). However, it permanently reduces the visual field and might induce myopia. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors for the treatment of ROP may enable continuing vascularization of the retina, potentially allowing the preservation of the visual field. However, for their use in infants concern remains. This meta-analysis explores the safety of VEGF inhibitors.
METHODS: The Ovid Interface was used to perform a systematic review of the literature in the databases PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library.
RESULTS: This meta-analysis included 24 original reports (including 1.457 eyes) on VEGF inhibitor treatment for ROP. The trials were solely observational except for one randomized and two case-control studies. We estimated a 6-month risk of retreatment per eye of 2.8%, and a 6-month risk of ocular complication without the need of retreatment of 1.6% per eye. Systemic complications were only reported as isolated incidents.
DISCUSSION: VEGF inhibitors seem to be associated with low recurrence rates and ocular complication rates. They may have the benefit of potentially allowing the preservation of visual field and lower rates of myopia. Due to the lack of data, the risk of systemic side effects cannot be assessed.
Retinopathy of Prematurity (ROP) is one of the most common causes of childhood blindness worldwide. Comparisons of anti-VEGF and laser treatments in ROP are relatively lacking, and the data are scattered and limited. The objective of this meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of both treatments in type-1 and threshold ROP.
METHODS:
A comprehensive literature search on ROP treatment was conducted using PubMed and Embase up to March 2017 in all languages. Major evaluation indexes were extracted from the included studies by two authors. The fixed-effects and random-effects models were used to measure the pooled estimates. The test of heterogeneity was performed using the Q statistic.
RESULTS:
Ten studies were included in this meta-analysis. Retreatment incidence was significantly increased for anti-VEGF (OR 2.52; 95% CI 1.37 to 4.66; P = 0.003) compared to the laser treatment, while the incidences of eye complications (OR 0.29; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.82; P = 0.02) and myopia were significantly decreased with anti-VEGF compared to the laser treatment. However, there was no difference in the recurrence incidence (OR 1.86; 95% CI 0.37 to 9.40; P = 0.45) and time between treatment and retreatment (WMD 7.54 weeks; 95% CI 2.00 to 17.08; P = 0.12).
CONCLUSION:
This meta-analysis indicates that laser treatment may be more efficacious than anti-VEGF treatment. However, the results of this meta-analysis also suggest that laser treatment may cause more eye complications and increase myopia. Large-scale prospective RCTs should be performed to assess the efficacy and safety of anti-VEGF versus laser treatment in the future.
