Ophthalmic plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2023
Teprotumumab and Orbital Decompression for the Management of Proptosis in Patients With Thyroid Eye Disease.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hubschman Sasha, Sojitra Badal, Ghiam Sean, Sears Connie, Hwangbo Nathan, Goldberg Robert A, Rootman Daniel B
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare outcomes of patients with thyroid eye disease treated with teprotumumab or orbital decompression, or both in sequence.
METHODS: Patients with thyroid eye disease and treated with decompression, teprotumumab, or both were included. Four groups were defined: decompression only, teprotumumab only, teprotumumab first with decompression later, and decompression first with teprotumumab later. The primary outcome was change in exophthalmometry. Secondary outcomes included change in extraocular muscle motility, strabismus, diplopia, and side effects.
RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-nine patients were included. The mean duration for early follow-up was 1.2 months for both decompression and teprotumumab groups. The mean late follow-up was 14.4 and 8.2 months for the decompression and teprotumumab groups respectively. Mean change in exophthalmometry was significantly greater for the decompression group (3.5 mm) compared with teprotumumab (2.0 mm) at late follow-up. Improvement in total extraocular muscle restriction was significantly greater in the teprotumumab group (14.7 degrees) than in the decompression group (2.6 degrees). The teprotumumab group had a significantly higher percentage of patients with diplopia score >1 at baseline and late follow-up ( p < 0.01) compared with the decompression group. Additional treatment with teprotumumab or decompression when previously treated with the opposite had similar proptosis reduction effect as that therapy alone.
CONCLUSIONS: Surgical decompression has a greater proptosis reduction effect than teprotumumab, whereas teprotumumab better improves extraocular muscle motility. The addition of teprotumumab or decompression to a previous course of the opposite adds a similar effect to the supplemental treatment alone.
METHODS: Patients with thyroid eye disease and treated with decompression, teprotumumab, or both were included. Four groups were defined: decompression only, teprotumumab only, teprotumumab first with decompression later, and decompression first with teprotumumab later. The primary outcome was change in exophthalmometry. Secondary outcomes included change in extraocular muscle motility, strabismus, diplopia, and side effects.
RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-nine patients were included. The mean duration for early follow-up was 1.2 months for both decompression and teprotumumab groups. The mean late follow-up was 14.4 and 8.2 months for the decompression and teprotumumab groups respectively. Mean change in exophthalmometry was significantly greater for the decompression group (3.5 mm) compared with teprotumumab (2.0 mm) at late follow-up. Improvement in total extraocular muscle restriction was significantly greater in the teprotumumab group (14.7 degrees) than in the decompression group (2.6 degrees). The teprotumumab group had a significantly higher percentage of patients with diplopia score >1 at baseline and late follow-up ( p < 0.01) compared with the decompression group. Additional treatment with teprotumumab or decompression when previously treated with the opposite had similar proptosis reduction effect as that therapy alone.
CONCLUSIONS: Surgical decompression has a greater proptosis reduction effect than teprotumumab, whereas teprotumumab better improves extraocular muscle motility. The addition of teprotumumab or decompression to a previous course of the opposite adds a similar effect to the supplemental treatment alone.