4.6 Review

Prevalence, incidence and future projection of diabetic eye disease in Europe: a systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 35, 期 1, 页码 11-23

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10654-019-00560-z

关键词

Diabetic retinopathy; Epidemiology; Prevalence; Incidence; Diabetic eye disease; Diabetic macular edema; Extrapolation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To examine the prevalence and incidence of diabetic eye disease (DED) among individuals with diabetes in Europe, a systematic review to identify all published European prevalence and incidence studies of DED in individuals with diabetes managed in primary health care was performed according to the MOOSE and PRISMA guidelines. The databases Medline, Embase and Web of Science were searched to 2 September 2017. Meta-analyses and meta-regressions were performed. The pooled prevalence estimates were applied to diabetes prevalence rates provided by the International Diabetes Foundation atlas and Eurostat population data, and extrapolated to the year 2050. Data of 35 prevalence and four incidence studies were meta-analyzed. Any diabetic retinopathy (DR) and diabetic macular edema (DME) were prevalent in 25.7% (95% CI 22.8-28.8%) and 3.7% (95% CI 2.2-6.2%), respectively. In meta-regression, the prevalence of DR in persons with type 1 diabetes was significantly higher compared to persons with type 2 diabetes (54.4% vs. 25.0%). The pooled mean annual incidence of any DR and DME in in persons with type 2 diabetes was 4.6% (95% CI 2.3-8.8%) and 0.4% (95% CI 0.5-1.4%), respectively. We estimated that persons with diabetes affected by any DED in Europe will increase from 6.4 million today to 8.6 million in 2050, of whom 30% require close monitoring and/or treatment. DED is estimated to be present in more than a quarter of persons with type 2 diabetes and half of persons with type 1 diabetes underlining the importance of regular monitoring. Future health services need to be planned accordingly.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据