5 results on '"Le JT"'
Search Results
2. Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgical Techniques for Open-Angle Glaucoma: An Overview of Cochrane Systematic Reviews and Network Meta-analysis.
- Author
-
Bicket AK, Le JT, Azuara-Blanco A, Gazzard G, Wormald R, Bunce C, Hu K, Jayaram H, King A, Otárola F, Nikita E, Shah A, Stead R, Tóth M, and Li T
- Subjects
- Humans, Intraocular Pressure, Network Meta-Analysis, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Systematic Reviews as Topic, Cataract complications, Glaucoma surgery, Glaucoma, Open-Angle complications, Glaucoma, Open-Angle surgery, Trabeculectomy methods
- Abstract
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.
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. Evaluation of Systematic Reviews of Interventions for Retina and Vitreous Conditions.
- Author
-
Le JT, Qureshi R, Twose C, Rosman L, Han G, Fapohunda K, Saldanha IJ, Scherer RW, Lum F, Al-Rajhi A, Musch DC, Hawkins BS, Dickersin K, and Li T
- Subjects
- Cross-Sectional Studies, Databases, Factual, Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Eye Diseases therapy, Retinal Diseases therapy, Systematic Reviews as Topic standards, Vitreous Body pathology
- Abstract
Importance: Patient care and clinical practice guidelines should be informed by evidence from reliable systematic reviews. The reliability of systematic reviews related to forthcoming guidelines for retina and vitreous conditions is unknown., Objectives: To summarize the reliability of systematic reviews on interventions for 7 retina and vitreous conditions, describe characteristics of reliable and unreliable systematic reviews, and examine the primary area in which they appeared to be lacking., Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional study of systematic reviews was conducted. Systematic reviews of interventions for retina- and vitreous-related conditions in a database maintained by the Cochrane Eyes and Vision United States Satellite were identified. Databases that the reviewers searched, whether any date or language restrictions were applied, and bibliographic information, such as year and journal of publication, were documented. The initial search was conducted in March 2007, and the final update was performed in July 2018. The conditions of interest were age-related macular degeneration; diabetic retinopathy; idiopathic epiretinal membrane and vitreomacular traction; idiopathic macular hole; posterior vitreous detachment, retinal breaks, and lattice degeneration; retinal and ophthalmic artery occlusions; and retinal vein occlusions. The reliability of each review was evaluated using prespecified criteria. Data were extracted by 2 research assistants working independently, with disagreements resolved through discussion or by 1 research assistant with verification by a senior team member., Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of reviews that meet all of the following criteria: (1) defined eligibility criteria for study selection, (2) described conducting a comprehensive literature search, (3) reported assessing risk of bias in included studies, (4) described using appropriate methods for any meta-analysis performed, and (5) provided conclusions consistent with review findings., Results: A total of 327 systematic reviews that addressed retina and vitreous conditions were identified; of these, 131 reviews (40.1%) were classified as reliable and 196 reviews (59.9%) were classified as not reliable. At least 1 reliable review was found for each of the 7 retina and vitreous conditions. The most common reason that a review was classified as not reliable was lack of evidence that a comprehensive literature search for relevant studies had been conducted (149 of 196 reviews [76.0%])., Conclusion and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that most systematic reviews that addressed interventions for retina and vitreous conditions were not reliable. Systematic review teams and guideline developers should work with information professionals who can help navigate sophisticated and varied syntaxes required to search different resources.
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. Outcome Specification in a Sample of Publicly Funded Eye and Vision Trials Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov.
- Author
-
Le JT, Sheng K, Saldanha IJ, Hawkins BS, and Li T
- Abstract
Importance: For findings from clinical trials to be actionable, outcomes measured in trials must be fully defined and, when appropriate, defined consistently across trials. Otherwise, it is difficult to compare findings between trials, combine results in meta-analyses, or leverage findings collectively to inform health care decision-making., Objective: To identify and characterize outcomes specified in ClinicalTrials.gov records for publicly funded clinical trials for 3 high-burden, high-prevalence eye conditions., Design, Setting, and Participants: ClinicalTrials.gov, a registry of publicly and privately supported clinical studies, was searched on January 31, 2019, for records of clinical trials for age-related macular degeneration (AMD), dry eye, or refractive error. The search was limited to trials funded by the National Eye Institute but did not impose a date restriction. Five elements of a well-specified outcome were extracted from each outcome stated in each record, including the domain, method of measurement, metric, method of aggregation, and time points., Main Outcomes and Measures: Number of outcome domains specified for trials for AMD, dry eye, and refractive error and the number of trial records specifying each unique domain., Results: A total of 49 unique outcome domains specified across 39 records of trials were identified. The median (interquartile range) number of records specifying each unique outcome domain was 1 (1-3), 1.5 (1-2), and 1 (1-1) for AMD, dry eye, and refractive error, respectively. Even when the same domains were registered across multiple trials, the time point, specific metric, and method of aggregation were specified in multiple ways., Conclusions and Relevance: There were too many outcomes with too little overlap in the sample of trials that were examined. Differences in how outcomes are measured across trials make it difficult to compare results, even for well-established domains, such as visual acuity. To reduce this waste in eye and vision research, the time is ripe for agreeing on what outcomes to measure.
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
5. Assessment of the Incorporation of Patient-Centric Outcomes in Studies of Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgical Devices.
- Author
-
Le JT, Viswanathan S, Tarver ME, Eydelman M, and Li T
- Subjects
- Clinical Trials as Topic, Equipment Design, Glaucoma physiopathology, Humans, Intraocular Pressure, Quality of Life, Tonometry, Ocular, Glaucoma surgery, Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures instrumentation, Patient-Centered Care methods, Trabeculectomy instrumentation, Visual Acuity
- Abstract
Importance: Minimally invasive glaucoma surgical (MIGS) devices are one option for lowering intraocular pressure in patients with glaucoma., Objective: To examine how often existing clinical studies of MIGS devices registered on ClinicalTrials.gov measure patient-centric outcomes that patients value directly., Design, Setting, and Participants: We searched ClinicalTrials.gov, a registry of publicly and privately supported clinical studies, on February 20, 2015, for records of MIGS device studies involving patients with glaucoma. Two investigators independently abstracted study design and outcome details from eligible records. We classified outcomes as patient-centric or not patient-centric using a prespecified definition., Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of patient-centric and nonpatient-centric outcomes registered on ClinicalTrials.gov., Results: We identified 51 eligible studies specifying 127 outcomes. Reduction in intraocular pressure was the most frequent outcome specified (78/127; 61%) and a primary outcome in 41 studies. Patient-centric outcomes-such as adverse events (n = 19; 15%), topical medication use (n = 16; 13%), visual acuity (n = 4; 3%), and health-related quality of life (n = 1; 1%)-were less frequently specified (n = 40; 32%) and a primary outcome in only 12 studies., Conclusion and Relevance: Patient-centric outcomes that provide insight into the relative desirability and acceptability of the benefits and risks of MIGS devices are not well represented in current clinical studies., Competing Interests: Disclosures: All authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest and none were reported.
- Published
- 2016
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.