4.7 Article

Uveitis in Children: The Role of Biological Agents in Its Management

期刊

BIOMEDICINES
卷 11, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines11020629

关键词

pediatric uveitis; juvenile idiopathic arthritis; TNF-alpha blockers; adalimumab; infliximab

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This retrospective study evaluated the medium and long-term effects of TNF-alpha inhibitors on pediatric uveitis. The results showed that TNF-alpha inhibitors effectively controlled the disease progression and reduced the need for steroids in children with chronic uveitis. Furthermore, the initial visual acuity was found to be a significant predictor for moderate to severe visual loss.
We aimed to determine medium and long-term effects of TNF-alpha inhibitors in patients with pediatric uveitis. This was a retrospective review of medical charts. Included were 50 patients (84 eyes). Mean age at diagnosis was 7.22 +/- 4.04 years. At baseline (time of initiation of biologic therapy), all patients had active uveitis. Complete control of uveitis was achieved in 84.52% (n = 71) of eyes, after a median of 3 months (IQR 2 months). Mean LogMAR BCVA at baseline was 0.23 +/- 0.44; it remained stable at 12 and 24 months. At baseline, 64% of patients were treated with oral corticosteroids, this decreased to 29.5% at 12 months (p = 0.001) and to 21.9% at 24 months (p < 0.001). Mean time to prednisone dose of <= 0.2 mg/kg/day was 8.1 +/- 2.02 months after baseline. A total of 40.5% of eyes were treated with topical steroids at baseline and this significantly decreased to 5.8% at 12 months. Multiple linear regression model was calculated to predict moderate and severe visual loss; only presenting visual acuity accounted for a unique variance in the model. In conclusion, TNF-alpha inhibitors achieved rapid disease control while enabling a remarkable steroid-sparing effect in children suffering from chronic uveitis. Presenting visual acuity was the sole predictor of moderate to severe visual loss.

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

4.7
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