Computerized pupillary light reflex assessment devices (CPLRADs) may serve as an effective screening tool for glaucomatous optic neuropathy, since they can dynamically detect abnormal pupillary responses from a novel sequence of light stimuli and functionally-shaped stimuli. The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the current state of advanced CPLRADs and accuracy of application in detecting glaucoma. An electronic literature search of PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase from database inception to December 2019 was performed. Studies that reported data on the use of computer-aided pupillometry with monocular and/or binocular monitoring in glaucoma patients were included. Two review authors independently conducted the study selection and extracted study data. A total of twenty-five studies were included in this review; eight studies with a total of 829 subjects were included in this meta-analysis. Data were pooled using a random-effect model, since the significant heterogeneity ( P < 0.1, I 2 > 50%). Our meta-analysis of eight studies showed reasonably high summary sensitivity and specificity estimates of 0.81 (95% CI 0.73–0.89) and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.75–0.91), respectively. Simpler monochromatic devices, such as Pupilmetrix TM PLR60, generally performed as well as or slightly better than more complex chromatic devices. This review suggests that CPLRADs may facilitate direct clinical decision making for glaucoma diagnosis and evaluation, and may provide a deeper understanding of the pathomechanism of glaucoma.
Background. Bleb needling with subconjunctival injection of antimetabolites had become a widely accepted approach for trabeculectomy failure. However, IOP reduction effects, success rates, and complications occurrence for this procedure showed great inconsistency among the different studies. Methods. We conducted a literature search on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. A random-effects model was performed on the extracted data based on the included studies. The intraocular pressure (IOP) and number of antiglaucomatous medications before and after the surgery were pooled for meta-analysis. The success and complication rates were estimated based on the results. Subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and metaregression were applied to explore the origination of heterogeneity. Results. Thirty-seven studies with a total of 2182 patients were finally included in our review. For the present meta-analysis, the overall effects of bleb needling at the last visit revealed a reduction in IOP of 9.74 mmHg (95% confidence interval (CI) [8.85, 10.63]), 45.9% (95% CI [39.0%, 53.0%]) for complete success rate, and 70.4% (95% CI [63.5%, 77.0%]) for qualified success rate. Application of mitomycin C (MMC) and 5-fluorouracil (5-Fu) during the procedure were efficacious for IOP control during the follow-up. Metaregression revealed that possible origination of heterogeneity was baseline IOP before bleb needling, revealing a trend that higher baseline IOP correlated with a greater IOP reduction results p < 0.001 . For safety profile, conjunctival haemorrhage (5.7%, 95% CI [2.5%, 10.1%]), hyphema (5.5%, 95% CI [3.0%, 8.7%]), and bleb leakage (5.0%, 95% CI [3.2%, 7.3%]) had the highest estimate of incidence. An increasing number of needling was the main risk factor for needling failure. Conclusion. Bleb needling with antimetabolites could be considered an effective and safe procedure after trabeculectomy failure. After the process, patients will gain IOP control and reduce antiglaucomatous medications for at least six months with 5-Fu or MMC. Meanwhile, the overall estimates for complications were relatively low in the whole process.
Preeclampsia (PE) is a serious pregnancy-related disease, and patients usually present with a high inflammatory response. Previous studies have suggested that aspirin (ASP) may have a role in alleviating the pathogenesis of preeclampsia. However, whether ASP can improve kidney damage and the mechanism for improving it is currently unclear. Here we optimized a lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced PE mouse model to identify the role of ASP in renal protection. We found that ASP treatment ameliorated LPS-induced renal failure and pathological changes, the tubular injury was significantly attenuated by ASP. Administration of ASP decreased the renal expression of pro-inflammatory factors, resulting in reduced kidney inflammation. The number of GALECTIN-3-positive cells was reduced, and the up-regulation of IL-6 and TNF-α was decreased. In addition, ASP also suppressed renal cell apoptosis and oxidative stress. An in vitro study indicated that ASP relieved LPS-induced HK-2 cell damage by inhibiting WNT5A/NF-κB signaling. Collectively, our data suggest that ASP is a useful therapeutic option for PE-related kidney injury.
Background Vision impairments (VIs) and blindness are major global public health issues. A visual acuity (VA) test is one of the most crucial standard psychophysical tests of visual function and has been widely used in a broad range of health care domains, especially in many clinical settings. In recent years, there has been increasing research on mobile app–based VA assessment designed to allow people to test their VA at any time and any location. Objective The goal of the review was to assess the accuracy and reliability of using mobile VA measurement apps. Methods We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for relevant articles on mobile apps for VA assessment published between January 1, 2008, and July 1, 2020. Two researchers independently inspected and selected relevant studies. Eventually, we included 22 studies that assessed tablet or smartphone apps for VA measurement. We then analyzed sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in the 6 papers we found through a meta-analysis. Results Most of the 22 selected studies can be considered of high quality based on the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies–2. In a meta-analysis of 6 studies involving 24,284 participants, we categorized the studies based on the age groups of the study participants (ie, aged 3-5 years, aged 6-22 years, and aged 55 years and older), examiner (ie, professional and nonprofessional examiners), and the type of mobile devices (ie, smartphone, iPad). In the group aged 3 to 5 years, the pooled sensitivity for VA app tests versus clinical VA tests was 0.87 (95% CI 0.79-0.93; P=.39), and the pooled specificity was 0.78 (95% CI 0.70-0.85; P=.37). In the group aged 6 to 22 years, the pooled sensitivity for VA app tests versus clinical VA tests was 0.86 (95% CI 0.84-0.87; P<.001), and the pooled specificity for VA app tests versus clinical VA tests was 0.91 (95% CI 0.90-0.91; P=.27). In the group aged 55 years and older, the pooled sensitivity for VA app tests versus clinical VA tests was 0.85 (95% CI 0.55-0.98), and the pooled specificity for VA app tests versus clinical VA tests was 0.98 (95% CI 0.95-0.99). We found that the nonprofessional examiner group (AUC 0.93) had higher accuracy than the professional examiner group (AUC 0.87). In the iPad-based group, the pooled sensitivity for VA app tests versus clinical VA tests was 0.86, and the pooled specificity was 0.79. In the smartphone-based group, the pooled sensitivity for VA app tests versus clinical VA tests was 0.86 (P<.001), and the pooled specificity for VA app tests versus clinical VA tests was 0.91 (P<.001). Conclusions In this study, we conducted a comprehensive review of the research on existing mobile apps for VA tests to investigate their diagnostic value and limitations. Evidence gained from this study suggests that mobile app–based VA tests can be useful for on-demand VI detection.
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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.