Autologous Serum Eye Drops for Dry Eye: Systematic Review.


Journal

Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry
ISSN: 1538-9235
Titre abrégé: Optom Vis Sci
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8904931

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 08 2023
Historique:
medline: 11 9 2023
pubmed: 6 7 2023
entrez: 6 7 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Dry eye is a common condition with serious implications worldwide. The unique composition of autologous serum (AS) eye drops has been hypothesized as a possible treatment. This study aimed to review the effectiveness and safety of AS. We searched five databases and three registries up to September 30, 2022. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing AS with artificial tears, saline, or placebo for participants with dry eye. We adhered to Cochrane methods for study selection, data extraction, risk-of-bias assessment, and synthesis. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework to evaluate the certainty of evidence. We included six RCTs with 116 participants. Four trials compared AS with artificial tears. We found low-certainty evidence that AS may improve symptoms (0- to 100-point pain scale) after 2 weeks of treatment compared with saline (mean difference, -12.00; 95% confidence interval, -20.16 to -3.84; 1 RCT, 20 participants). Ocular surface outcomes (corneal staining, conjunctival staining, tear breakup time, Schirmer test) were inconclusive. Two trials compared AS with saline. Very low-certainty evidence suggested that Rose Bengal staining (0- to 9-point scale) may be slightly improved after 4 weeks of treatment compared with saline (mean difference, -0.60; 95% confidence interval, -1.11 to -0.09; 35 eyes). None of the trials reported outcomes of corneal topography, conjunctival biopsy, quality of life, economic outcomes, or adverse events. We were unable to use all data because of unclear reporting. The effectiveness of AS is uncertain based on current data. Symptoms improved slightly with AS compared with artificial tears for 2 weeks. Staining scores improved slightly with AS compared with saline, with no benefit identified for other measures. High-quality, large trials enrolling diverse participants with varying severity are needed. A core outcome set would allow for evidence-based treatment decisions consistent with current knowledge and patient values.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Dry eye is a common condition with serious implications worldwide. The unique composition of autologous serum (AS) eye drops has been hypothesized as a possible treatment.
OBJECTIVES
This study aimed to review the effectiveness and safety of AS.
DATA SOURCES
We searched five databases and three registries up to September 30, 2022.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing AS with artificial tears, saline, or placebo for participants with dry eye.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
We adhered to Cochrane methods for study selection, data extraction, risk-of-bias assessment, and synthesis. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework to evaluate the certainty of evidence.
RESULTS
We included six RCTs with 116 participants. Four trials compared AS with artificial tears. We found low-certainty evidence that AS may improve symptoms (0- to 100-point pain scale) after 2 weeks of treatment compared with saline (mean difference, -12.00; 95% confidence interval, -20.16 to -3.84; 1 RCT, 20 participants). Ocular surface outcomes (corneal staining, conjunctival staining, tear breakup time, Schirmer test) were inconclusive. Two trials compared AS with saline. Very low-certainty evidence suggested that Rose Bengal staining (0- to 9-point scale) may be slightly improved after 4 weeks of treatment compared with saline (mean difference, -0.60; 95% confidence interval, -1.11 to -0.09; 35 eyes). None of the trials reported outcomes of corneal topography, conjunctival biopsy, quality of life, economic outcomes, or adverse events.
LIMITATIONS
We were unable to use all data because of unclear reporting.
CONCLUSIONS
The effectiveness of AS is uncertain based on current data. Symptoms improved slightly with AS compared with artificial tears for 2 weeks. Staining scores improved slightly with AS compared with saline, with no benefit identified for other measures.
IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS
High-quality, large trials enrolling diverse participants with varying severity are needed. A core outcome set would allow for evidence-based treatment decisions consistent with current knowledge and patient values.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37410855
doi: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000002042
pii: 00006324-990000000-00129
pmc: PMC10510841
mid: NIHMS1913675
doi:

Substances chimiques

Lubricant Eye Drops 0
Saline Solution 0

Types de publication

Systematic Review Journal Article Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

564-571

Subventions

Organisme : NEI NIH HHS
ID : UG1 EY020522
Pays : United States

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Optometry.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflict of Interest Disclosure: NGQ has reported no conflict of interest. LL has reported salary support from the National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health (payment to institution). TL serves as the principal investigator for Cochrane Eyes and Vision US Project, which is supported by a grant UG1 EY020522 from the National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health.

Références

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Feb 28;2:CD009327
pubmed: 28245347
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2022 Dec 1;140(12):1181-1192
pubmed: 36301551
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Dec 18;12:CD011016
pubmed: 31847055
CLAO J. 1995 Oct;21(4):221-32
pubmed: 8565190
Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2013 Dec;22(12):1581-601
pubmed: 24088227
Ophthalmology. 2020 Jan;127(1):128-133
pubmed: 31561880
Curr Eye Res. 2012 Aug;37(8):684-8
pubmed: 22670856
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2018 Oct 1;136(10):1170-1179
pubmed: 30128547
Clin Ophthalmol. 2015 Sep 16;9:1719-30
pubmed: 26396495
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jun 26;6:CD006775
pubmed: 28649802
Br J Ophthalmol. 2015 Jan;99(1):108-12
pubmed: 25138758
Blood Transfus. 2019 May;17(3):200-209
pubmed: 31246562
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Sep 13;9:CD010051
pubmed: 31517988
BMJ. 2017 Jun 30;357:j2835
pubmed: 28667088
Front Med (Lausanne). 2018 Feb 23;5:33
pubmed: 29527528
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Aug 27;(8):CD009327
pubmed: 23982997
J Refract Surg. 2006 Jan-Feb;22(1):61-6
pubmed: 16447938
Ocul Surf. 2017 Jul;15(3):334-365
pubmed: 28736337
Br J Ophthalmol. 2012 Dec;96(12):1498-503
pubmed: 23001257
Eye (Lond). 2009 Feb;23(2):290-3
pubmed: 18188173
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003 Nov;44(11):4753-61
pubmed: 14578396
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012 May 04;53(6):2601-6
pubmed: 22427596
Cornea. 2001 Nov;20(8):802-6
pubmed: 11685055
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Mar 18;3:CD013559
pubmed: 32182637
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013 Oct 18;54(11):TFOS14-9
pubmed: 24058134
Curr Eye Res. 2017 Jun;42(6):827-831
pubmed: 28139163
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2014 Apr;252(4):619-26
pubmed: 24566903
Cornea. 2009 Jun;28(5):493-7
pubmed: 19421051
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006 Oct;47(10):4309-15
pubmed: 17003420
Ophthalmology. 2019 Jan;126(1):6-9
pubmed: 30577918
Am J Ophthalmol. 2005 Feb;139(2):242-6
pubmed: 15733983
Ocul Surf. 2017 Jul;15(3):276-283
pubmed: 28736335
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Oct 21;10:CD015070
pubmed: 36269562
Trials. 2020 Jul 6;21(1):613
pubmed: 32631413
Arthritis Rheumatol. 2017 Jan;69(1):35-45
pubmed: 27785888
Optom Vis Sci. 2022 Oct 1;99(10):735-736
pubmed: 36198147
BMJ. 2019 Jul 31;366:l4378
pubmed: 31366597
Ophthalmic Res. 2020;63(5):443-451
pubmed: 31884498

Auteurs

Louis Leslie (L)

Department of Ophthalmology, University of Colorado-Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado.

Tianjing Li (T)

Department of Ophthalmology, University of Colorado-Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH