In recent years, various studies have followed in the literature on the therapeutic effects of mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) on damage in retinal cells. The evidence that MSCs exert their regenerative and damage reduction effect in a paracrine way, through the release of soluble factors and exosomes, is now consolidated. Exosomes are microvesicles formed by a double layer of phospholipid membrane and carry proteins and RNA, through which they play a therapeutic role on target cells. Scientific research has recently focused on the use of exosomes derived from MSC in various models of retinal damage in vitro and in vivo as they, compared to MSCs, have similar functions and at the same time have different advantages such as greater stability and handling, a lower chance of immunological rejection and no risk of malignant transformation. The purpose of this review is to summarize current knowledge on the therapeutic use of exosomes derived from MSCs in retinal damage and to stimulate new clinical perspectives regarding their use.
Purpose: To compare conventional internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling versus inverted flap technique in small-to-medium idiopathic macular hole.Methods: Eyes with #400 mm idiopathic macular holes were randomized into the conventional ILM peeling group (25 eyes) and inverted flap group (25 eyes). A 12-month followup was considered. Macular sensitivity (MS) change detected with MP-1 microperimetry was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included best-corrected visual acuity change, closure rate, anatomical findings on optical coherence tomography such as Ushape foveal contour, restoration of external limiting membrane, and ellipsoid zone.Results: In both groups, MS improved throughout the follow-up. Final MS was greater in the conventional ILM peeling group compared with the inverted flap group, being 16.6 6 2.3 dB versus 14.9 6 2.9 dB, respectively (P = 0.026). In both groups best-corrected visual acuity improved throughout the follow-up, with a final best-corrected visual acuity of 0.19 6 0.14 logMar (20/31 Snellen) in the conventional ILM group and 0.22 6 0.11 logMar (20/33 Snellen) in the inverted flap group (P = 0.398). Anatomical hole closure was achieved in all cases. No difference in optical coherence tomography findings was shown between the two groups.Conclusion: A better final MS was found in eyes undergoing conventional ILM peeling. Inverted flap technique has disadvantages compared with conventional peeling for the treatment of small-to-medium idiopathic macular holes.
Background:The aim of this study is to evaluate eye structures and function in patients receiving iron chelating therapy and to assess whether a correlation exists between the onset of ocular alterations and the intake of iron chelating drugs. Methods: A prospective cohort study was performed. Eighty-eight patients, composed of children and adults with thalassemia major (TM) who are taking or had taken iron chelating drugs (deferoxamine, deferiprone or deferasirox), have been initially enrolled in the study. The final sample featured 80 patients, including 18 children and 62 adults. These subjects received an eye examination to evaluate intraocular pressure (IOP), best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), the presence of refractive defects, cornea, anterior chamber, lens, fundus oculi, visual field and mean retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness. Logistic regression model analysis was performed in order to assess any correlation. In addition, a literature search regarding the relation between iron chelating drugs and ocular adverse events was carried out to compare the results obtained with the evidence in the literature. Results: Logistic regression did not report a significant correlation between the intake of iron chelating drugs and the onset of anterior ocular segment alterations, lens opacities, retinal diseases, optical neuropathies, astigmatism, visual field and RNFL thickness defects. Logistic regression returned a statistically significant correlation between myopia and iron chelation therapy (p-value 0.04; OR 1.05) and also between presbyopia and total duration of therapy with deferoxamine (p-value 0.03; OR 1.21). Although intraocular pressure levels remained within the normal range, a significant correlation with the length of deferoxamine therapy has been found (p-value 0.002; association coefficient −0.12). A negative correlation between deferiprone and presbyopia has also been observed. Conclusion: Iron chelation therapy is not associated with severe visual function alterations. Limitation of deferoxamine treatment can help prevent ocular complications. Deferiprone and/or deferasirox may be preferable, especially in patients over age 40 years.
We conducted a meta-analysis of real-world studies on the 0.19 mg Fluocinolone Acetonide (FAc) intravitreal implant for chronic diabetic macular oedema (DMO), comparing these findings with the Fluocinolone Acetonide for Diabetic Macular Edema (FAME) study. The primary outcome was mean change of best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 24 months. Secondary outcomes were 36-month mean BCVA, mean central macular thickness (CMT) change, rates of eyes receiving supplementary intravitreal therapy, cataract surgery, intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering drops and glaucoma surgery. Mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Nine real-world studies were included. The FAc implant yielded a significantly improved BCVA at 24 and 36 months (24-month MD = 4.52; 95% CI 2.56–6.48; 36-month MD = 8.10; 95% CI 6.34–9.86). These findings were comparable with the FAME study. The FAc implant yielded significantly reduced 24- and 36-month CMT. Pooled proportions of cataract surgery, IOP-lowering drops and glaucoma surgery were 39%, 27% and 3%, respectively, all lower than the FAME study. Pooled estimate of supplementary intravitreal therapy was 39%, higher than the 15.2% of the FAME study. This meta-analysis of real-world studies confirms favorable visual and anatomical outcomes following FAc insert for chronic DMO. In real-life studies more than one third of patients received supplementary intravitreal therapy, an issue that needs to be further explored.
Teleophthalmology (TO) consists of the clinical and therapeutic approach to the patient (e-Health) using informatic and telecommunication systems. Already widespread worldwide, it aims to improve patient care, expand the healthcare offer, and access to medical care by reducing overall costs. Despite the organizational, legal, and management difficulties, the substantial economic investments necessary for the start-up of equipped structures and efficient territorial services are amply rewarded by economic results and optimal services for professionals and patients. This review specifically analyses the current scenario of teleophthalmology, the points for and against its application in different sociodemographic realities, and in particular, the current and future fields of use.
Sex hormones are molecules produced by the gonads and to a small extent by the adrenal gland, which not only determine the primary and secondary sexual characteristics of an individual, differentiating man from woman, but also participate in the functioning of the various systems of the body. The evidence that many eye diseases differ in terms of prevalence between men and women has allowed us, in recent years, to carry out several studies that have investigated the association between sex hormones and the pathophysiology of eye tissues. Specific receptors for sex hormones have been found on the lacrimal and meibomian glands, conjunctiva, cornea, lens, retina, and choroid. This work summarizes the current knowledge on the role that sex hormones play in the pathogenesis of the most common ocular disorders and indicates our clinical experience in these situations. The aim is to stimulate an interdisciplinary approach between endocrinology, neurology, molecular biology, and ophthalmology to improve the management of these diseases and to lay the foundations for new therapeutic strategies.
Purpose Reintervention rate is an important factor impacting on patients, surgeons, and society. To date, only a few studies have focused on this topic. For this reason, a systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to assess the reintervention rate after glaucoma filtering surgery. Materials and Methods Prospective studies reporting the reintervention rate after glaucoma filtering surgery and with at least 12 months of follow-up were systematically searched on PubMed, Medline and Embase databases. The primary outcome was the total reintervention rate following surgery. Secondary outcomes were: the rate of manipulation, in-clinic and in-operating room reintervention; the reintervention rate for intraocular pressure (IOP) control and for complications; demographic, clinical and surgical variables associated with reintervention rate. Results Ninety-three studies with a total of 8345 eyes were eligible. The total reintervention rate was 1.84 (95% CI 1.57–2.13), with a lower rate for Baerveldt (0.53, 95% CI 0.29–0.83) and Preserflo (0.60, 95% CI 0.15–1.29), and a higher rate for Xen (4.26, 95% CI 2.59–6.31). The manipulation rate was 0.99 (95% CI 0.77–1.23), the in-clinic reintervention rate was 0.08 (95% CI 0.05–0.12) and the in-operating room reintervention rate was 0.28 (95% CI 0.22–0.35). The reintervention rate for IOP control was 1.26 (95% CI 1.04–1.51) and the reintervention rate for complications was 0.27 (95% CI 0.21–0.35). Conclusions All types of surgery presented a total reintervention rate similar to the overall findings, except studies on Baerveldt and Preserflo Microshunt, with a lower rate, and Xen, with a higher rate. None of the variables evaluated were found to be directly associated with the explored outcomes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.