Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Objective The efficacy and safety of propranolol for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) remain under debate. This network meta-analysis (NMA) focuses on whether a ranking may be established for different dose levels of propranolol as treatment of ROP in terms of stage progression as the primary outcome, with appearance of plus disease and need for anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGFs) or laser therapy as secondary endpoints. Methods Fourteen studies (10 randomised controlled trials, three single-arm trials and one retrospective observational study) of 474 patients treated with oral or ocular propranolol were retrieved from databases up to April 2024. Meta-insight and model-based NMA were undertaken to evaluate the propranolol dose–response relationship. Studies were evaluated for model fit, risk of bias and Confidence of evidence In Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA). Effect sizes were determined as odds ratio (OR) with 95% credible interval (CrI). Results Bayesian analysis showed a trend towards improved effects for propranolol given at late stages (stages 2–3; S23) of ROP progression compared with its administration at earlier stages (stages 0–1; S01). OR values for oral propranolol 1.5 and 2 mg/kg/day given at S23 were 0.13 (95% CrI 0.04–0.37) and 0.16 (95% CrI 0.04–0.61), respectively, while given at S01 were 0.28 (95% CrI 0.02–2.96) and 0.78 (95% CrI 0.14–4.43), respectively. Similarly, OR of eye propranolol 0.2% at S23 was 0.37 (95% CrI 0.09–1.00) versus an S01 OR of 0.64 (95% CrI 0.21–2.04). Surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) analyses confirmed best probability values for oral propranolol 1.5–2 mg/kg followed by eye propranolol 0.2%, all at S23. Model-based NMA showed nonlinearity in the dose–response for oral propranolol with a trend to greater maximal effect for its administration at late versus early stages. For secondary endpoints, lower risk values were found with oral propranolol 1.5 mg/kg/day at S23 for progression to plus disease (OR 0.14; 95% CrI 0.02–0.84) and need for anti-VEGFs (OR 0.23; 95% CrI 0.05–0.93) and laser (OR 0.16; 95% CrI 0.02–1.10) therapies also followed by eye propranolol 0.2%, and a similar profile was obtained with SUCRA analysis. Lower doses (0.5–1.0 mg/kg/day) of oral propranolol retained efficacy. Threat of adverse events was estimated as risk difference versus control with no difference for eye propranolol 0.2% and oral propranolol 0.5 mg/kg/day, modest increases of risk for oral propranolol 1.0 and 1.5 mg/kg/day and the highest risk difference for oral propranolol 2.0 mg/kg/day (0.06; 95% CI −0.01 to 0.13). Conclusion A diminished risk of disease progression and need for additional treatment was obtained with propranolol in ROP, but safety is a potential concern. Propranolol eye micro-drops (0.2%) can be as efficacious as oral propranolol. Nonetheless, the evidence is limited due to the paucity and quality of the available studies. ...
Objective The efficacy and safety of propranolol for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) remain under debate. This network meta-analysis (NMA) focuses on whether a ranking may be established for different dose levels of propranolol as treatment of ROP in terms of stage progression as the primary outcome, with appearance of plus disease and need for anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGFs) or laser therapy as secondary endpoints. Methods Fourteen studies (10 randomised controlled trials, three single-arm trials and one retrospective observational study) of 474 patients treated with oral or ocular propranolol were retrieved from databases up to April 2024. Meta-insight and model-based NMA were undertaken to evaluate the propranolol dose–response relationship. Studies were evaluated for model fit, risk of bias and Confidence of evidence In Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA). Effect sizes were determined as odds ratio (OR) with 95% credible interval (CrI). Results Bayesian analysis showed a trend towards improved effects for propranolol given at late stages (stages 2–3; S23) of ROP progression compared with its administration at earlier stages (stages 0–1; S01). OR values for oral propranolol 1.5 and 2 mg/kg/day given at S23 were 0.13 (95% CrI 0.04–0.37) and 0.16 (95% CrI 0.04–0.61), respectively, while given at S01 were 0.28 (95% CrI 0.02–2.96) and 0.78 (95% CrI 0.14–4.43), respectively. Similarly, OR of eye propranolol 0.2% at S23 was 0.37 (95% CrI 0.09–1.00) versus an S01 OR of 0.64 (95% CrI 0.21–2.04). Surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) analyses confirmed best probability values for oral propranolol 1.5–2 mg/kg followed by eye propranolol 0.2%, all at S23. Model-based NMA showed nonlinearity in the dose–response for oral propranolol with a trend to greater maximal effect for its administration at late versus early stages. For secondary endpoints, lower risk values were found with oral propranolol 1.5 mg/kg/day at S23 for progression to plus disease (OR 0.14; 95% CrI 0.02–0.84) and need for anti-VEGFs (OR 0.23; 95% CrI 0.05–0.93) and laser (OR 0.16; 95% CrI 0.02–1.10) therapies also followed by eye propranolol 0.2%, and a similar profile was obtained with SUCRA analysis. Lower doses (0.5–1.0 mg/kg/day) of oral propranolol retained efficacy. Threat of adverse events was estimated as risk difference versus control with no difference for eye propranolol 0.2% and oral propranolol 0.5 mg/kg/day, modest increases of risk for oral propranolol 1.0 and 1.5 mg/kg/day and the highest risk difference for oral propranolol 2.0 mg/kg/day (0.06; 95% CI −0.01 to 0.13). Conclusion A diminished risk of disease progression and need for additional treatment was obtained with propranolol in ROP, but safety is a potential concern. Propranolol eye micro-drops (0.2%) can be as efficacious as oral propranolol. Nonetheless, the evidence is limited due to the paucity and quality of the available studies. ...
<b><i>Background:</i></b> Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP), a potentially blinding disease, is increasing worldwide because of the increased survival of extremely preterm and preterm infants born where oxygen monitoring and ROP screening programs are insufficient. Repeated retinal examinations are stressful for infants, and laser photocoagulation treatment for sight-threatening ROP is destructive. The use of anti-VEGF agents instead of lasers is widespread but requires a long-term follow-up because of late recurrence of the disease. In addition, the optimal anti-VEGF agent dosage and long-term systemic effects require further study. <b><i>Summary:</i></b> Interventions preventing ROP would be far preferable, and systemic interventions might promote better development of the brain and other organs. Interventions such as improved oxygen control, provision of fresh maternal milk, supplementation with arachidonic acid and docosahexaenoic acid, and fetal hemoglobin preservation by reducing blood sample volumes may help prevent ROP and reduce the need for treatment. Free readily available online tools to predict severe ROP may reduce unnecessary eye examinations and select, for screening, those at a high risk of needing treatment. <b><i>Key Messages:</i></b> Treatment warranting ROP is a sign of impaired neurovascular development in the central nervous system. Preventative measures to improve the outcomes are available. Screening can be refined using tools that can predict severe ROP. Laser treatment and anti-VEGF agents are valuable treatment modalities that may complement each other in recurrent ROP.
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.