{"title":"弱视儿童复视治疗与补片治疗的疗效和安全性:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Mumen H Halabi, Bashaer Aldhahwani","doi":"10.1111/aos.17583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Amblyopia is the leading cause of monocular vision loss in children. Standard treatment begins with refractive correction, followed by interventions to stimulate the amblyopic eye. Dichoptic therapy (DT) and patching therapy (PT) are commonly used but differ in mechanism. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares their efficacy, compliance and safety in paediatric amblyopia. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Embase was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DT and PT in children with amblyopia. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Pooled data were analysed using a random-effects model, reported as mean differences (MD) or risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Twelve RCTs involving 1034 children were included. No significant differences were observed between DT and PT in visual acuity (MD = -0.01, 95% CI [-0.05, 0.03], p = 0.54; I<sup>2</sup> = 85%), stereoacuity (MD = 0.01, 95% CI [-0.07, 0.08], p = 0.84; I<sup>2</sup> = 17%), compliance (RR = 0.91, 95% CI [0.71, 1.18], p = 0.49; I<sup>2</sup> = 85%) or adverse events (RR = 1.46, 95% CI [0.53, 4.04], p = 0.46; I<sup>2</sup> = 54%). DT and PT show comparable outcomes in visual acuity, stereoacuity, compliance and safety based on pooled data. However, these findings may not apply to all amblyopia types, particularly strabismic amblyopia, where binocular function is often absent. Future studies should include subtype-specific analyses to better define the roles of each treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":6915,"journal":{"name":"Acta Ophthalmologica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The efficacy and safety of dichoptic therapy in comparison to patching in children with amblyopia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Mumen H Halabi, Bashaer Aldhahwani\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/aos.17583\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Amblyopia is the leading cause of monocular vision loss in children. Standard treatment begins with refractive correction, followed by interventions to stimulate the amblyopic eye. Dichoptic therapy (DT) and patching therapy (PT) are commonly used but differ in mechanism. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares their efficacy, compliance and safety in paediatric amblyopia. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Embase was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DT and PT in children with amblyopia. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Pooled data were analysed using a random-effects model, reported as mean differences (MD) or risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Twelve RCTs involving 1034 children were included. No significant differences were observed between DT and PT in visual acuity (MD = -0.01, 95% CI [-0.05, 0.03], p = 0.54; I<sup>2</sup> = 85%), stereoacuity (MD = 0.01, 95% CI [-0.07, 0.08], p = 0.84; I<sup>2</sup> = 17%), compliance (RR = 0.91, 95% CI [0.71, 1.18], p = 0.49; I<sup>2</sup> = 85%) or adverse events (RR = 1.46, 95% CI [0.53, 4.04], p = 0.46; I<sup>2</sup> = 54%). DT and PT show comparable outcomes in visual acuity, stereoacuity, compliance and safety based on pooled data. However, these findings may not apply to all amblyopia types, particularly strabismic amblyopia, where binocular function is often absent. Future studies should include subtype-specific analyses to better define the roles of each treatment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6915,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Ophthalmologica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Ophthalmologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.17583\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Ophthalmologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.17583","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
弱视是儿童单眼视力丧失的主要原因。标准治疗从屈光矫正开始,然后进行刺激弱视眼的干预。二分疗法(DT)和补片疗法(PT)是常用的治疗方法,但作用机制不同。本系统综述和荟萃分析比较了它们在儿童弱视中的疗效、依从性和安全性。综合检索PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science和Embase,比较DT和PT治疗弱视儿童的随机对照试验(rct)。采用Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估方法学质量。使用随机效应模型对合并数据进行分析,报告为95%置信区间(ci)的平均差异(MD)或风险比(RR)。纳入12项随机对照试验,涉及1034名儿童。DT组和PT组在视力(MD = -0.01, 95% CI [-0.05, 0.03], p = 0.54; I2 = 85%)、立体视力(MD = 0.01, 95% CI [-0.07, 0.08], p = 0.84; I2 = 17%)、依从性(RR = 0.91, 95% CI [0.71, 1.18], p = 0.49; I2 = 85%)或不良事件(RR = 1.46, 95% CI [0.53, 4.04], p = 0.46; I2 = 54%)方面均无显著差异。基于汇总数据,DT和PT在视力、立体视敏度、依从性和安全性方面显示出相当的结果。然而,这些发现可能并不适用于所有类型的弱视,特别是斜视弱视,其中双眼功能经常缺失。未来的研究应包括亚型特异性分析,以更好地定义每种治疗的作用。
The efficacy and safety of dichoptic therapy in comparison to patching in children with amblyopia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Amblyopia is the leading cause of monocular vision loss in children. Standard treatment begins with refractive correction, followed by interventions to stimulate the amblyopic eye. Dichoptic therapy (DT) and patching therapy (PT) are commonly used but differ in mechanism. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares their efficacy, compliance and safety in paediatric amblyopia. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Embase was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DT and PT in children with amblyopia. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Pooled data were analysed using a random-effects model, reported as mean differences (MD) or risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Twelve RCTs involving 1034 children were included. No significant differences were observed between DT and PT in visual acuity (MD = -0.01, 95% CI [-0.05, 0.03], p = 0.54; I2 = 85%), stereoacuity (MD = 0.01, 95% CI [-0.07, 0.08], p = 0.84; I2 = 17%), compliance (RR = 0.91, 95% CI [0.71, 1.18], p = 0.49; I2 = 85%) or adverse events (RR = 1.46, 95% CI [0.53, 4.04], p = 0.46; I2 = 54%). DT and PT show comparable outcomes in visual acuity, stereoacuity, compliance and safety based on pooled data. However, these findings may not apply to all amblyopia types, particularly strabismic amblyopia, where binocular function is often absent. Future studies should include subtype-specific analyses to better define the roles of each treatment.
期刊介绍:
Acta Ophthalmologica is published on behalf of the Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation and is the official scientific publication of the following societies: The Danish Ophthalmological Society, The Finnish Ophthalmological Society, The Icelandic Ophthalmological Society, The Norwegian Ophthalmological Society and The Swedish Ophthalmological Society, and also the European Association for Vision and Eye Research (EVER).
Acta Ophthalmologica publishes clinical and experimental original articles, reviews, editorials, educational photo essays (Diagnosis and Therapy in Ophthalmology), case reports and case series, letters to the editor and doctoral theses.