Search

Artificial intelligence (AI) methods and AI-enabled metrics hold tremendous potential to advance surgical education. Our objective was to generate consensus guidance on specific needs for AI methods and AI-enabled metrics for surgical education.The study included a systematic literature search, a virtual conference, and a 3-round Delphi survey of 40 representative multidisciplinary stakeholders with domain expertise selected through purposeful sampling. The accelerated Delphi process was completed within 10 days. The survey covered overall utility, anticipated future (10-year time horizon), and applications for surgical training, assessment, and feedback. Consensus was agreement among 80% or more respondents. We coded survey questions into 11 themes and descriptively analyzed the responses.The respondents included surgeons (40%), engineers (15%), affiliates of industry (27.5%), professional societies (7.5%), regulatory agencies (7.5%), and a lawyer (2.5%). The survey included 155 questions; consensus was achieved on 136 (87.7%). The panel listed 6 deliverables each for AI-enhanced learning curve analytics and surgical skill assessment. For feedback, the panel identified 10 priority deliverables spanning 2-year (n = 2), 5-year (n = 4), and 10-year (n = 4) timeframes. Within 2 years, the panel expects development of methods to recognize anatomy in images of the surgical field and to provide surgeons with performance feedback immediately after an operation. The panel also identified 5 essential that should be included in operative performance reports for surgeons.The Delphi panel consensus provides a specific, bold, and forward-looking roadmap for AI methods and AI-enabled metrics for surgical education.

Surgery is a major source of errors in patient care. Preventing complications from surgical errors in the operating room is estimated to lead to reduction of up to 41,846 readmissions and save $620.3 million per year. It is now established that poor technical skill is associated with an increased risk of severe adverse events after surgery and traditional models to train surgeons are being challenged by rapid advances in technology, an intensified patient-safety culture, and a need for value-driven health systems. This review discusses the current methods available for evaluating technical skills in cataract surgery as well as the recent technological advancements that have enabled capture and analysis of large amounts of complex surgical data for more automated objective skills assessment.

Current virtual reality-based (VR) simulators for robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery (RAMIS) training lack effective teaching and coaching. Our objective was to develop an automated teaching framework for VR training in RAMIS. Second, we wanted to study the effect of such real-time teaching cues on surgical technical skill acquisition. Third, we wanted to assess skill in terms of surgical technique in addition to traditional time and motion efficiency metrics. We implemented six teaching cues within a needle passing task on the da Vinci Skills Simulator platform (noncommercial research version). These teaching cues are graphical overlays designed to demonstrate ideal surgical technique, e.g., what path to follow while passing needle through tissue. We created three coaching modes: teach (continuous demonstration), metrics (demonstration triggered by performance metrics), and user (demonstration upon user request). We conducted a randomized controlled trial where the experimental group practiced using automated teaching and the control group practiced in a self-learning manner without automated teaching. We analyzed data from 30 participants (14 in experimental and 16 in control group). After three practice repetitions, control group showed higher improvement in time and motion efficiency, while experimental group showed higher improvement in surgical technique compared to their baseline measurements. The experimental group showed more improvement than the control group on a surgical technique metric (at what angle is needle grasped by an instrument), and the difference between groups was statistically significant. In a pilot randomized controlled trial, we observed that automated teaching cues can improve the performance of surgical technique in a VR simulator for RAMIS needle passing. Our study was limited by its recruitment of nonsurgeons and evaluation of a single configuration of coaching modes.

Purpose: Surgery involves modifying anatomy to achieve a goal. Reconstructing anatomy can facilitate surgical care through surgical planning, real-time decision support, or anticipating outcomes. Tool motion is a rich source of data that can be used to quantify anatomy. Our work develops and validates a method for reconstructing the nasal septum from unstructured motion of the Cottle elevator during the elevation phase of septoplasty surgery, without need to explicitly delineate the surface of the septum. Approach: The proposed method uses iterative closest point registration to initially register a template septum to the tool motion. Subsequently, statistical shape modeling with iterative most likely oriented point registration is used to fit the reconstructed septum to Cottle tip position and orientation during flap elevation. Regularization of the shape model and transformation is incorporated. The proposed methods were validated on 10 septoplasty surgeries performed on cadavers by operators of varying experience level. Preoperative CT images of the cadaver septums were segmented as ground truth. Results: We estimated reconstruction error as the difference between the projections of the Cottle tip onto the surface of the reconstructed septum and the ground-truth septum segmented from the CT image. We found translational differences of 2.74(2.06-2.81) mm and a rotational differences of 8.95(7.11-10.55) deg between the reconstructed septum and the ground-truth septum [median (interquartile range)], given the optimal regularization parameters. Conclusions: Accurate reconstruction of the nasal septum can be achieved from tool tracking data during septoplasty surgery on cadavers. This enables understanding of the septal anatomy without need for traditional medical imaging. This result may be used to facilitate surgical planning, intraoperative care, or skills assessment.

Objective assessment of intraoperative technical skill is necessary for technology to improve patient care through surgical training. Our objective in this study was to develop and validate deep learning techniques for technical skill assessment using videos of the surgical field. We used a data set of 99 videos of capsulorhexis, a critical step in cataract surgery. One expert surgeon annotated each video for technical skill using a standard structured rating scale, the International Council of Ophthalmology’s Ophthalmology Surgical Competency Assessment Rubric:phacoemulsification (ICO-OSCAR:phaco). Using two capsulorhexis indices in this scale (commencement of flap and follow-through, formation and completion), we specified an expert performance when at least one of the indices was 5 and the other index was at least 4, and novice otherwise. In addition, we used scores for capsulorhexis commencement and capsulorhexis formation as separate ground truths (Likert scale of 2 to 5; analyzed as 2/3, 4 and 5). We crowdsourced annotations of instrument tips. We separately modeled instrument trajectories and optical flow using temporal convolutional neural networks to predict a skill class (expert/novice) and score on each item for capsulorhexis in ICO-OSCAR:phaco. We evaluated the algorithms in a five-fold cross-validation and computed accuracy and area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC). The accuracy and AUC were 0.848 and 0.863 for instrument tip velocities, and 0.634 and 0.803 for optical flow fields, respectively. Deep neural networks effectively model surgical technical skill in capsulorhexis given structured representation of intraoperative data such as optical flow fields extracted from video or crowdsourced tool localization information.

Purpose To evaluate time as an objective measure of technical skill assessment in cataract surgery. Setting Single academic center. Design Cross-sectional study. Methods One hundred videos of cataract surgery (29 performed by a faculty and 71 performed by trainee surgeons) performed at the Wilmer Eye Institute between July 2011 and December 2017 were analyzed for surgical technical skill as a function of time using task-specific indices, global skill indices, and appointment status. Results Expert surgeons, defined by global skill, did not consistently have shorter times to complete phases in cataract surgery compared with novice surgeons. Time to complete phases in cataract surgery was predictive of global skill (area under the curve [AUC] of 0.73, 95% CI: 0.63-0.83) and of surgeons' appointment status (AUC 0.82, 95% CI: 0.70-0.91). Time for capsulorhexis correctly distinguished between expert-novice skill class only 58% (AUC 0.58, 95% CI: 0.47-0.69) of the times when capsulorhexis indices were used and 51% (AUC 0.51, 95% CI: 0.39-0.63) of the times when global indices were used. Time to complete quadrants in capsulorhexis also had a low ability to discriminate between novice and expert instances for capsulorhexis skill and global skill. The AUC was 0.54 (95% CI: 0.44-0.66) and 0.53 (95% CI: 0.41-0.65) for capsulorhexis skill and global skill, respectively. Conclusions Time as an objective measure of skill was limited in its ability to distinguish between expert and novice skill class in a meaningful way.

Stimulus deprivation amblyopia (SDA) develops due to an obstruction to the passage of light secondary to a condition such as cataract. The obstruction prevents formation of a clear image on the retina. SDA can be resistant to treatment, leading to poor visual prognosis. SDA probably constitutes less than 3% of all amblyopia cases, although precise estimates of prevalence are unknown. In developed countries, most patients present under the age of one year; in less developed parts of the world patients are likely to be older at the time of presentation. The mainstay of treatment is removal of the cataract and then occlusion of the better-seeing eye, but regimens vary, can be difficult to execute, and traditionally are believed to lead to disappointing results.Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of occlusion therapy for SDA in an attempt to establish realistic treatment outcomes. Where data were available, we also planned to examine evidence of any dose response effect and to assess the effect of the duration, severity, and causative factor on the size and direction of the treatment effect.We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 9), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to October 2013), EMBASE (January 1980 to October 2013), the Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) (January 1982 to October 2013), PubMed (January 1946 to October 2013), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com ), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 28 October 2013.We planned to include randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials of participants with unilateral SDA with visual acuity worse than 0.2 LogMAR or equivalent. We did not specify any restrictions for inclusion based upon age, gender, ethnicity, co-morbidities, medication use, or the number of participants.Two review authors independently assessed study abstracts identified by the electronic searches.We did not identify any trials that met the inclusion criteria specified in the protocol for this review.We found no evidence on the effectiveness of any treatment for SDA. Future randomized controlled trials are needed in order to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of occlusion, duration of treatment, level of vision that can be realistically achieved, effects of age at onset and magnitude of visual defect, optimum occlusion regimen, and factors associated with satisfactory and unsatisfactory outcomes with the use of various interventions for SDA.

Healthcare in general, and surgery/interventional care in particular, is evolving through rapid advances in technology and increasing complexity of care, with the goal of maximizing the quality and value of care. Whereas innovations in diagnostic and therapeutic technologies have driven past improvements in the quality of surgical care, future transformation in care will be enabled by data. Conventional methodologies, such as registry studies, are limited in their scope for discovery and research, extent and complexity of data, breadth of analytical techniques, and translation or integration of research findings into patient care. We foresee the emergence of surgical/interventional data science (SDS) as a key element to addressing these limitations and creating a sustainable path toward evidence-based improvement of interventional healthcare pathways. SDS will create tools to measure, model, and quantify the pathways or processes within the context of patient health states or outcomes and use information gained to inform healthcare decisions, guidelines, best practices, policy, and training, thereby improving the safety and quality of healthcare and its value. Data are pervasive throughout the surgical care pathway; thus, SDS can impact various aspects of care, including prevention, diagnosis, intervention, or postoperative recovery. The existing literature already provides preliminary results, suggesting how a data science approach to surgical decision-making could more accurately predict severe complications using complex data from preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative contexts, how it could support intraoperative decision-making using both existing knowledge and continuous data streams throughout the surgical care pathway, and how it could enable effective collaboration between human care providers and intelligent technologies. In addition, SDS is poised to play a central role in surgical education, for example, through objective assessments, automated virtual coaching, and robot-assisted active learning of surgical skill. However, the potential for transforming surgical care and training through SDS may only be realized through a cultural shift that not only institutionalizes technology to seamlessly capture data but also assimilates individuals with expertise in data science into clinical research teams. Furthermore, collaboration with industry partners from the inception of the discovery process promotes optimal design of data products as well as their efficient translation and commercialization. As surgery continues to evolve through advances in technology that enhance delivery of care, SDS represents a new knowledge domain to engineer surgical care of the future.

Easy acquisition of surgical data opens many opportunities to automate skill evaluation and teaching. Current technology to search tool motion data for surgical activity segments of interest is limited by the need for manual pre-processing, which can be prohibitive at scale. We developed a content-based information retrieval method, query-by-example (QBE), to automatically detect activity segments within surgical data recordings of long duration that match a query. The example segment of interest (query) and the surgical data recording (target trial) are time series of kinematics. Our approach includes an unsupervised feature learning module using a stacked denoising autoencoder (SDAE), two scoring modules based on asymmetric subsequence dynamic time warping (AS-DTW) and template matching, respectively, and a detection module. A distance matrix of the query against the trial is computed using the SDAE features, followed by AS-DTW combined with template scoring, to generate a ranked list of candidate subsequences (substrings). To evaluate the quality of the ranked list against the ground-truth, thresholding conventional DTW distances and bipartite matching are applied. We computed the recall, precision, F1-score, and a Jaccard index-based score on three experimental setups. We evaluated our QBE method using a suture throw maneuver as the query, on two tool motion datasets (JIGSAWS and MISTIC-SL) captured in a training laboratory. We observed a recall of 93, 90 and 87 % and a precision of 93, 91, and 88 % with same surgeon same trial (SSST), same surgeon different trial (SSDT) and different surgeon (DS) experiment setups on JIGSAWS, and a recall of 87, 81 and 75 % and a precision of 72, 61, and 53 % with SSST, SSDT and DS experiment setups on MISTIC-SL, respectively. We developed a novel, content-based information retrieval method to automatically detect multiple instances of an activity within long surgical recordings. Our method demonstrated adequate recall across different complexity datasets and experimental conditions.

Automatically segmenting and classifying surgical activities is an important prerequisite to providing automated, targeted assessment and feedback during surgical training. Prior work has focused almost exclusively on recognizing gestures, or short, atomic units of activity such as pushing needle through tissue, whereas we also focus on recognizing higher-level maneuvers, such as suture throw. Maneuvers exhibit more complexity and variability than the gestures from which they are composed, however working at this granularity has the benefit of being consistent with existing training curricula.Prior work has focused on hidden Markov model and conditional-random-field-based methods, which typically leverage unary terms that are local in time and linear in model parameters. Because maneuvers are governed by long-term, nonlinear dynamics, we argue that the more expressive unary terms offered by recurrent neural networks (RNNs) are better suited for this task. Four RNN architectures are compared for recognizing activities from kinematics: simple RNNs, long short-term memory, gated recurrent units, and mixed history RNNs. We report performance in terms of error rate and edit distance, and we use a functional analysis-of-variance framework to assess hyperparameter sensitivity for each architecture.We obtain state-of-the-art performance for both maneuver recognition from kinematics (4 maneuvers; error rate of [Formula: see text]; normalized edit distance of [Formula: see text]) and gesture recognition from kinematics (10 gestures; error rate of [Formula: see text]; normalized edit distance of [Formula: see text]).Automated maneuver recognition is feasible with RNNs, an exciting result which offers the opportunity to provide targeted assessment and feedback at a higher level of granularity. In addition, we show that multiple hyperparameters are important for achieving good performance, and our hyperparameter analysis serves to aid future work in RNN-based activity recognition.

IMPORTANCE: Daytime sleepiness in surgical trainees can impair intraoperative technical skill and thus affect their learning and pose a risk to patient safety. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between daytime sleepiness of surgeons in residency and fellowship training and their intraoperative technical skill during septoplasty. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This prospective cohort study included 19 surgical trainees in otolaryngology–head and neck surgery programs at 2 academic institutions (Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and MedStar Georgetown University Hospital). The physicians were recruited from June 13, 2016, to April 20, 2018. The analysis includes data that were captured between June 27, 2016, and April 20, 2018. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Attending physician and surgical trainee self-rated intraoperative technical skill using the Septoplasty Global Assessment Tool (SGAT) and visual analog scales. Daytime sleepiness reported by surgical trainees was measured using the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS). RESULTS: Of 19 surgical trainees, 17 resident physicians (9 female [53%]) and 2 facial plastic surgery fellowship physicians (1 female and 1 male) performed a median of 3.00 septoplasty procedures (range, 1-9 procedures) under supervision by an attending physician. Of the 19 surgical trainees, 10 (53%) were aged 25 to 30 years and 9 (47%) were 31 years or older. The mean ESS score overall was 6.74 (95% CI, 5.96-7.52), and this score did not differ between female and male trainees. The mean ESS score was 7.57 (95% CI, 6.58-8.56) in trainees aged 25 to 30 years and 5.44 (95% CI, 4.32-6.57) in trainees aged 31 years or older. In regression models adjusted for sex, age, postgraduate year, and technical complexity of the procedure, there was a statistically significant inverse association between ESS scores and attending physician–rated technical skill for both SGAT (−0.41; 95% CI, −0.55 to −0.27; P

Currently available methods for surgical skills assessment are either subjective or only provide global evaluations for the overall task. Such global evaluations do not inform trainees about where in the task they need to perform better. In this study, we investigated the reliability and validity of a framework to generate objective skill assessments for segments within a task, and compared assessments from our framework using crowdsourced segment ratings from surgically untrained individuals and expert surgeons against manually assigned global rating scores. Our framework includes (1) a binary classifier trained to generate preferences for pairs of task segments (i.e., given a pair of segments, specification of which one was performed better), (2) computing segment-level percentile scores based on the preferences, and (3) predicting task-level scores using the segment-level scores. We conducted a crowdsourcing user study to obtain manual preferences for segments within a suturing and knot-tying task from a crowd of surgically untrained individuals and a group of experts. We analyzed the inter-rater reliability of preferences obtained from the crowd and experts, and investigated the validity of task-level scores obtained using our framework. In addition, we compared accuracy of the crowd and expert preference classifiers, as well as the segment- and task-level scores obtained from the classifiers. We observed moderate inter-rater reliability within the crowd (Fleiss’ kappa, $$\kappa = 0.41$$ ) and experts ( $$\kappa = 0.55$$ ). For both the crowd and experts, the accuracy of an automated classifier trained using all the task segments was above par as compared to the inter-rater agreement [crowd classifier 85 % (SE 2 %), expert classifier 89 % (SE 3 %)]. We predicted the overall global rating scores (GRS) for the task with a root-mean-squared error that was lower than one standard deviation of the ground-truth GRS. We observed a high correlation between segment-level scores ( $$\rho \ge 0.86$$ ) obtained using the crowd and expert preference classifiers. The task-level scores obtained using the crowd and expert preference classifier were also highly correlated with each other ( $$\rho \ge 0.84$$ ), and statistically equivalent within a margin of two points (for a score ranging from 6 to 30). Our analyses, however, did not demonstrate statistical significance in equivalence of accuracy between the crowd and expert classifiers within a 10 % margin. Our framework implemented using crowdsourced pairwise comparisons leads to valid objective surgical skill assessment for segments within a task, and for the task overall. Crowdsourcing yields reliable pairwise comparisons of skill for segments within a task with high efficiency. Our framework may be deployed within surgical training programs for objective, automated, and standardized evaluation of technical skills.

Background Surgeons who perform laparotomy have a number of decisions to make regarding abdominal closure. Material and size of potential suture types varies widely. In addition, surgeons can choose to close the incision in anatomic layers or mass ('en masse'), as well as using either a continuous or interrupted suturing technique, of which there are different styles of each. There is ongoing debate as to which suturing techniques and suture materials are best for achieving definitive wound closure while minimising the risk of short- and long-term complications. Objectives The objectives of this review were to identify the best available suture techniques and suture materials for closure of the fascia following laparotomy incisions, by assessing the following comparisons: absorbable versus non-absorbable sutures; mass versus layered closure; continuous versus interrupted closure techniques; monofilament versus multifilament sutures; and slow absorbable versus fast absorbable sutures. Our objective was not to determine the single best combination of suture material and techniques, but to compare the individual components of abdominal closure. Search methods On 8 February 2017 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two trials registries, and Science Citation Index. There were no limitations based on language or date of publication. We searched the reference lists of all included studies to identify trials that our searches may have missed. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared suture materials or closure techniques, or both, for fascial closure of laparotomy incisions. We excluded trials that compared only types of skin closures, peritoneal closures or use of retention sutures. Data collection and analysis We abstracted data and assessed the risk of bias for each trial. We calculated a summary risk ratio (RR) for the outcomes assessed in the review, all of which were dichotomous. We used random-effects modelling, based on the heterogeneity seen throughout the studies and analyses. We completed subgroup analysis planned a priori for each outcome, excluding studies where interventions being compared differed by more than one component, making it impossible to determine which variable impacted on the outcome, or the possibility of a synergistic effect. We completed sensitivity analysis, excluding trials with at least one trait with high risk of bias. We assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADEpro guidelines. Main results Fifty-five RCTs with a total of 19,174 participants met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Included studies were heterogeneous in the type of sutures used, methods of closure and patient population. Many of the included studies reported multiple comparisons. For our primary outcome, the proportion of participants who developed incisional hernia at one year or more of follow-up, we did not find evidence that suture absorption (absorbable versus non-absorbable sutures, RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.32, moderate-quality evidence; or slow versus fast absorbable sutures, RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.06, moderate-quality evidence), closure method (mass versus layered, RR 1.92, 95% CI 0.58 to 6.35, very low-quality evidence) or closure technique (continuous versus interrupted, RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.35, moderate-quality evidence) resulted in a difference in the risk of incisional hernia. We did, however, find evidence to suggest that monofilament sutures reduced the risk of incisional hernia when compared with multifilament sutures (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.98, I2 = 30%, moderate-quality evidence). For our secondary outcomes, we found that none of the interventions reduced the risk of wound infection, whether based on suture absorption (absorbable versus non-absorbable sutures, RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.17, moderate-quality evidence; or slow versus fast absorbable sutures, RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.57, moderate-quality evidence), closure method (mass versus layered, RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.30, low-quality evidence) or closure technique (continuous versus interrupted, RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.34, moderate-quality evidence). Similarily, none of the interventions reduced the risk of wound dehiscence whether based on suture absorption (absorbable versus non-absorbable sutures, RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.10, moderate-quality evidence; or slow versus fast absorbable sutures, RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.61, moderate-quality evidence), closure method (mass versus layered, RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.52, moderate-quality evidence) or closure technique (continuous versus interrupted, RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.64, moderate-quality evidence). Absorbable sutures, compared with non-absorbable sutures (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.94, low-quality evidence) reduced the risk of sinus or fistula tract formation. None of the other comparisons showed a difference (slow versus fast absorbable sutures, RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.05 to 16.05, very low-quality evidence; mass versus layered, RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.62, low-quality evidence; continuous versus interrupted, RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.64 to 3.61, very low-quality evidence). Authors' conclusions Based on this moderate-quality body of evidence, monofilament sutures may reduce the risk of incisional hernia. Absorbable sutures may also reduce the risk of sinus or fistula tract formation, but this finding is based on low-quality evidence. We had serious concerns about the design or reporting of several of the 55 included trials. The comparator arms in many trials differed by more than one component, making it impossible to attribute differences between groups to any one component. In addition, the patient population included in many of the studies was very heterogeneous. Trials included both emergency and elective cases, different types of disease pathology (e.g. colon surgery, hepatobiliary surgery, etc.) or different types of incisions (e.g. midline, paramedian, subcostal). Consequently, larger, high-quality trials to further address this clinical challenge are warranted. Future studies should ensure that proper randomisation and allocation techniques are performed, wound assessors are blinded, and that the duration of follow-up is adequate. It is important that only one type of intervention is compared between groups. In addition, a homogeneous patient population would allow for a more accurate assessment of the interventions.

Background Aqueous shunts are employed to control intraocular pressure (IOP) for people with primary or secondary glaucomas who fail or are not candidates for standard surgery. Objectives To assess the effectiveness and safety of aqueous shunts for reducing IOP in glaucoma compared with standard surgery, another type of aqueous shunt, or modification to the aqueous shunt procedure. Search methods We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2016, Issue 8), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to August 2016), Embase.com (1947 to August 2016), PubMed (1948 to August 2016), LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database) (1982 to August 2016), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov); searched 15 August 2016, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en); searched 15 August 2016. We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic search for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 15 August 2016. We also searched the reference lists of identified trial reports and the Science Citation Index to find additional trials. Selection criteria We included randomized controlled trials that compared various types of aqueous shunts with standard surgery or to each other in eyes with glaucoma. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently screened search results for eligibility, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted data from included trials. We contacted trial investigators when data were unclear or not reported. We graded the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We followed standard methods as recommended by Cochrane. Main results We included 27 trials with a total of 2099 participants with mixed diagnoses and comparisons of interventions. Seventeen studies reported adequate methods of randomization, and seven reported adequate allocation concealment. Data collection and follow-up times varied. Four trials compared an aqueous shunt (Ahmed or Baerveldt) with trabeculectomy, of which three reported one-year outcomes. At one-year, the difference in IOP between aqueous shunt groups and trabeculectomy groups was uncertain (mean difference (MD) 2.55 mmHg, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.78 to 5.87; 380 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The difference in logMAR visual acuity was also uncertain (MD 0.12 units, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.31; 380 participants; very low-certainty evidence). In two trials, the difference in visual field score was uncertain (MD -0.25, 95% CI -1.91 to 1.40; 196 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The mean number of antiglaucoma medications was higher in the aqueous shunt group than the trabeculectomy group in one trial (MD 0.80, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.12; 184 participants; low-certainty evidence). The effect on needing additional glaucoma surgery was uncertain between groups in two trials (risk ratio (RR) 0.24, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.36; 329 participants; very low-certainty evidence). In one trial, fewer total adverse events were reported in the aqueous shunt group than the trabeculectomy group (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.81; 212 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No trial reported quality-of-life outcomes at one-year follow-up. Two trials that compared the Ahmed implant with the Baerveldt implant for glaucoma found higher mean IOP in the Ahmed group at one-year follow-up (MD 2.60 mmHg, 95% CI 1.58 to 3.62; 464 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The difference in logMAR visual acuity was uncertain between groups (MD -0.07 units, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.13; 501 participants; low-certainty evidence). The MD in number of antiglaucoma medications was within one between groups (MD 0.35, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.59; 464 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). More participants in the Ahmed group required additional glaucoma surgery than the Baerveldt group (RR 2.77, 95% CI 1.02 to 7.54; 514 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The two trials reported specific adverse events but not overall number of adverse events. Neither trial reported visual field or quality-of-life outcomes at one-year follow-up. One trial compared the Ahmed implant with the Molteno implant for glaucoma over two-year follow-up. Mean IOP was higher in the Ahmed group than the Molteno group (MD 1.64 mmHg, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.43; 57 participants; low-certainty evidence). The differences in logMAR visual acuity (MD 0.08 units, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.40; 57 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and mean deviation in visual field (MD -0.18 dB, 95% CI -3.13 to 2.77; 57 participants; very low-certainty evidence) were uncertain between groups. The mean number of antiglaucoma medications was also uncertain between groups (MD -0.38, 95% CI -1.03 to 0.27; 57 participants; low-certainty evidence). The trial did not report the proportion needing additional glaucoma surgery, total adverse events, or quality-of-life outcomes. Two trials compared the double-plate Molteno implant with the Schocket shunt for glaucoma; one trial reported outcomes only at six-month follow-up, and the other did not specify the follow-up time. At six-months, mean IOP was lower in the Molteno group than the Schocket group (MD -2.50 mmHg, 95% CI -4.60 to -0.40; 115 participants; low-certainty evidence). Neither trial reported the proportion needing additional glaucoma surgery, total adverse events, or visual acuity, visual field, or quality-of-life outcomes. The remaining 18 trials evaluated modifications to aqueous shunts, including 14 trials of Ahmed implants (early aqueous suppression versus standard medication regimen, 2 trials; anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agent versus none, 4 trials; corticosteroids versus none, 2 trials; shunt augmentation versus none, 3 trials; partial tube ligation versus none, 1 trial; pars plana implantation versus conventional implantation, 1 trial; and model M4 versus model S2,1 trial); 1 trial of 500 mm2 Baerveldt versus 350 mm2 Baerveldt; and 3 trials of Molteno implants (single-plate with oral corticosteroids versus single-plate without oral corticosteroids, 1 trial; double-plate versus single-plate, 1 trial; and pressure-ridge versus double-plate with tube ligation, 1 trial). Authors' conclusions Information was insufficient to conclude whether there are differences between aqueous shunts and trabeculectomy for glaucoma treatment. While the Baerveldt implant may lower IOP more than the Ahmed implant, the evidence was of moderate-certainty and it is unclear whether the difference in IOP reduction is clinically significant. Overall, methodology and data quality among existing randomized controlled trials of aqueous shunts was heterogeneous across studies, and there are no well-justified or widely accepted generalizations about the superiority of one surgical procedure or device over another.

Ocular infestation with Toxoplasma gondii, a parasite, may result in inflammation in the retina, choroid, and uvea and consequently lead to complications such as glaucoma, cataract, and posterior synechiae.The objective of this systematic review was to assess the effects of adjunctive use of corticosteroids for ocular toxoplasmosis.We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 9), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE, (January 1950 to October 2012), EMBASE (January 1980 to October 2012), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) (January 1982 to October 2012), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We searched the reference lists of included studies for any additional studies not identified by the electronic searches. We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 11 October 2012.We planned to include randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials. Eligible trials would have enrolled participants of any age who were immunocompetent and were diagnosed with active ocular toxoplasmosis. Included trials would have compared anti-parasitic therapy plus corticosteroids versus anti-parasitic therapy alone, or different doses or times of initiation of corticosteroids.Two authors independently screened titles and abstracts retrieved from the electronic searches. We retrieved full-text articles of studies categorized as 'unsure' or 'include' after review of the abstracts. Two authors independently reviewed each full-text article. Discrepancies were resolved through discussion.The electronic searches retrieved 368 titles and abstracts. We reviewed 20 full-text articles. We identified no trials eligible for inclusion in this systematic review.Although research has identified wide variation in practices regarding use of corticosteroids, our systematic review did not identify evidence from randomized controlled trials for the role of corticosteroids in the management of ocular toxoplasmosis. Several questions remain unanswered by well-conducted randomized trials in this context, including whether use of corticosteroids is more effective than use of anti-parasitic therapy alone, when corticosteroids should be initiated in the treatment regimen (early versus late course of treatment), and which dosage and duration of steroid use is best. These questions are easily amenable to research using a randomized controlled design and they are ethical due to the absence of evidence to support or discourage use of corticosteroids for this condition. The question of foremost importance, however, is whether they should be used as adjunct therapy (that is, additional) to anti-parasitic agents.

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review is to evaluate the effects of MMC on the cornea and answer the question: is there sufficient evidence for using intraoperative topical MMC on the cornea in surface ablation (PRK or LASEK or epi‐LASIK) as prophylaxis for haze formation and to reduce refractive regression? This review will address the use of MMC in the prophylaxis of myopic patients who underwent PRK or LASEK or epi‐LASIK. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: If sufficient data are available, a secondary objective of this review is to determine the refractive predictability and complications with different concentrations and times of exposure to MMC as well as to find out if there are differences in proportion of patients with haze among different laser platforms used for PRK, LASEK, and epi‐LASIK. Refractive predictability is defined as the difference between the attempted and achieved refractive change, in other words, the difference between the mean postoperative spherical equivalent (SE) and the target SE using the manifest refraction (Joo 2005).

Background Surgical tasks are performed in a sequence of steps, and technical skill evaluation includes assessing task flow efficiency. Our objective was to describe differences in task flow for expert and novice surgeons for a basic surgical task. Methods We used a hierarchical semantic vocabulary to decompose and annotate maneuvers and gestures for 135 instances of a surgeon’s knot performed by 18 surgeons. We compared counts of maneuvers and gestures, and analyzed task flow by skill level. Results Experts used fewer gestures to perform the task (26.29; 95% CI = 25.21 to 27.38 for experts vs. 31.30; 95% CI = 29.05 to 33.55 for novices) and made fewer errors in gestures than novices (1.00; 95% CI = 0.61 to 1.39 vs. 2.84; 95% CI = 2.3 to 3.37). Transitions among maneuvers, and among gestures within each maneuver for expert trials were more predictable than novice trials. Conclusions Activity segments and state flow transitions within a basic surgical task differ by surgical skill level, and can be used to provide targeted feedback to surgical trainees.

Objective Task-level metrics of time and motion efficiency are valid measures of surgical technical skill. Metrics may be computed for segments (maneuvers and gestures) within a task after hierarchical task decomposition. Our objective was to compare task-level and segment (maneuver and gesture)-level metrics for surgical technical skill assessment. Design Our analyses include predictive modeling using data from a prospective cohort study. We used a hierarchical semantic vocabulary to segment a simple surgical task of passing a needle across an incision and tying a surgeon’s knot into maneuvers and gestures. We computed time, path length, and movements for the task, maneuvers, and gestures using tool motion data. We fit logistic regression models to predict experience-based skill using the quantitative metrics. We compared the area under a receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for task-level, maneuver-level, and gesture-level models. Setting Robotic surgical skills training laboratory. Participants In total, 4 faculty surgeons with experience in robotic surgery and 14 trainee surgeons with no or minimal experience in robotic surgery. Results Experts performed the task in shorter time (49.74 s; 95% CI = 43.27-56.21 vs. 81.97; 95% CI = 69.71-94.22), with shorter path length (1.63 m; 95% CI = 1.49-1.76 vs. 2.23; 95% CI = 1.91-2.56), and with fewer movements (429.25; 95% CI = 383.80-474.70 vs. 728.69; 95% CI = 631.84-825.54) than novices. Experts differed from novices on metrics for individual maneuvers and gestures. The AUCs were 0.79; 95% CI = 0.62-0.97 for task-level models, 0.78; 95% CI = 0.6-0.96 for maneuver-level models, and 0.7; 95% CI = 0.44-0.97 for gesture-level models. There was no statistically significant difference in AUC between task-level and maneuver-level (p = 0.7) or gesture-level models (p = 0.17). Conclusions Maneuver-level and gesture-level metrics are discriminative of surgical skill and can be used to provide targeted feedback to surgical trainees.

Previous work on surgical skill assessment using intraoperative tool motion has focused on highly structured surgical tasks such as cholecystectomy and used generic motion metrics such as time and number of movements. Other statistical methods such as hidden Markov models (HMM) and descriptive curve coding (DCC) have been successfully used to assess skill in structured activities on bench-top tasks. Methods to assess skill and provide effective feedback to trainees for unstructured surgical tasks in the operating room, such as tissue dissection in septoplasty, have yet to be developed. We proposed a method that provides a descriptive structure for septoplasty by automatically segmenting it into higher-level meaningful activities called strokes. These activities characterize the surgeon’s tool motion pattern. We constructed a spatial graph from the sequence of strokes in each procedure and used its properties to train a classifier to distinguish between expert and novice surgeons. We compared the results from our method with those from HMM, DCC, and generic metric-based approaches. We showed that our method—with an average accuracy of 91 %—performs better or equal than these state-of-the-art methods, while simultaneously providing surgeons with an intuitive understanding of the procedure. In this study, we developed and evaluated an automated approach to objectively assess surgical skill during unstructured task of tissue dissection in nasal septoplasty.

Background Cataract formation or acceleration can occur after intraocular surgery, especially following vitrectomy, a surgical technique for removing the vitreous that is used in the treatment of many disorders that affect the posterior segment of the eye. The underlying problem that led to vitrectomy may limit the benefit from removal of the cataractous lens. Objectives To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of surgery versus no surgery for postvitrectomy cataract with respect to visual acuity, quality of life, and other outcomes. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2017, Issue 5), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 17 May 2017), Embase.com (1947 to 17 May 2017), PubMed (1946 to 17 May 2017), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database (LILACS) (January 1982 to 17 May 2017), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com); last searched May 2013, ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov); searched 17 May 2017, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en); searched 17 May 2017. We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. Selection criteria We planned to include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that had compared surgery versus no surgery to remove the lens from eyes of adults in which cataracts had developed following vitrectomy. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently screened the search results according to the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Main results We found no RCTs or quasi-RCTs that had compared surgery versus no surgery to remove the lens from eyes of adults in which cataracts had developed following vitrectomy. Authors' conclusions There is no evidence from RCTs or quasi-RCTs on which to base clinical recommendations for surgery for postvitrectomy cataract. There is a clear need for RCTs to address this evidence gap. Such trials should stratify participants by their age, the retinal disorder leading to vitrectomy, and the status of the underlying disease process in the contralateral eye. Outcomes assessed in such trials may include changes (both gains and losses) of visual acuity, quality of life, and adverse events such as posterior capsular rupture and retinal detachment. Both short-term (six-month) and long-term (one- or two-year) outcomes should be examined.

There is good evidence of selective outcome reporting in published reports of randomized trials.We examined reporting practices for trials of gabapentin funded by Pfizer and Warner-Lambert's subsidiary, Parke-Davis (hereafter referred to as Pfizer and Parke-Davis) for off-label indications (prophylaxis against migraine and treatment of bipolar disorders, neuropathic pain, and nociceptive pain), comparing internal company documents with published reports.We identified 20 clinical trials for which internal documents were available from Pfizer and Parke-Davis; of these trials, 12 were reported in publications. For 8 of the 12 reported trials, the primary outcome defined in the published report differed from that described in the protocol. Sources of disagreement included the introduction of a new primary outcome (in the case of 6 trials), failure to distinguish between primary and secondary outcomes (2 trials), relegation of primary outcomes to secondary outcomes (2 trials), and failure to report one or more protocol-defined primary outcomes (5 trials). Trials that presented findings that were not significant (Por = 0.05) for the protocol-defined primary outcome in the internal documents either were not reported in full or were reported with a changed primary outcome. The primary outcome was changed in the case of 5 of 8 published trials for which statistically significant differences favoring gabapentin were reported. Of the 21 primary outcomes described in the protocols of the published trials, 6 were not reported at all and 4 were reported as secondary outcomes. Of 28 primary outcomes described in the published reports, 12 were newly introduced.We identified selective outcome reporting for trials of off-label use of gabapentin. This practice threatens the validity of evidence for the effectiveness of off-label interventions.

BACKGROUND: Age‐related macular degeneration (AMD) is the most common cause of uncorrectable severe vision loss in people aged 55 years and older in the developed world. Choroidal neovascularization (CNV) secondary to AMD accounts for most cases of AMD‐related severe vision loss. Intravitreous injection of anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor (anti‐VEGF) agents aims to block the growth of abnormal blood vessels in the eye to prevent vision loss and, in some instances, to improve vision. OBJECTIVES: • To investigate ocular and systemic effects of, and quality of life associated with, intravitreous injection of three anti‐VEGF agents (pegaptanib, ranibizumab, and bevacizumab) versus no anti‐VEGF treatment for patients with neovascular AMD • To compare the relative effects of one of these anti‐VEGF agents versus another when administered in comparable dosages and regimens SEARCH METHODS: To identify eligible studies for this review, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register (searched January 31, 2018); MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to January 31, 2018); Embase Ovid (1947 to January 31, 2018); the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (1982 to January 31, 2018); the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trials Number (ISRCTN) Registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch ‐ searched January 31, 2018); ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov ‐ searched November 28, 2018); and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en ‐ searched January 31, 2018). We did not impose any date or language restrictions in electronic searches for trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated pegaptanib, ranibizumab, or bevacizumab versus each other or versus a control treatment (e.g. sham treatment, photodynamic therapy), in which participants were followed for at least one year. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risks of bias. We contacted trial authors for additional data. We compared outcomes using risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs). We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We included 16 RCTs that had enrolled a total of 6347 participants with neovascular AMD (the number of participants per trial ranged from 23 to 1208) and identified one potentially relevant ongoing trial. Six trials compared anti‐VEGF treatment (pegaptanib, ranibizumab, or bevacizumab) versus control, and 10 trials compared bevacizumab versus ranibizumab. Pharmaceutical companies conducted or sponsored four trials but funded none of the studies that evaluated bevacizumab. Researchers conducted these trials at various centers across five continents (North and South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia). The overall certainty of the evidence was moderate to high, and most trials had an overall low risk of bias. All but one trial had been registered prospectively. When compared with those who received control treatment, more participants who received intravitreous injection of any of the three anti‐VEGF agents had gained 15 letters or more of visual acuity (risk ratio [RR] 4.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.32 to 7.55; moderate‐certainty evidence), had lost fewer than 15 letters of visual acuity (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.55; high‐certainty evidence), and showed mean improvement in visual acuity (mean difference 6.7 letters, 95% CI 4.4 to 9.0 in one pegaptanib trial; mean difference 17.8 letters, 95% CI 16.0 to 19.7 in three ranibizumab trials; moderate‐certainty evidence) after one year of follow‐up. Participants treated with anti‐VEGF agents showed improvement in morphologic outcomes (e.g. size of CNV, central retinal thickness) compared with participants not treated with anti‐VEGF agents (moderate‐certainty evidence). No trial directly compared pegaptanib versus another anti‐VEGF agent and followed participants for one year; however, when compared with control treatments, ranibizumab and bevacizumab each yielded larger improvements in visual acuity outcomes than pegaptanib. Visual acuity outcomes after bevacizumab and ranibizumab were similar when the same RCTs compared the same regimens with respect to gain of 15 or more letters of visual acuity (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.12; high‐certainty evidence) and loss of fewer than 15 letters of visual acuity (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.02; high‐certainty evidence); results showed similar mean improvement in visual acuity (mean difference [MD] ‐0.5 letters, 95% CI ‐1.5 to 0.5; high‐certainty evidence) after one year of follow‐up, despite the substantially lower cost of bevacizumab compared with ranibizumab. Reduction in central retinal thickness was less among bevacizumab‐treated participants than among ranibizumab‐treated participants after one year (MD ‐11.6 μm, 95% CI ‐21.6 to ‐1.7; high‐certainty evidence); however, this difference is within the range of measurement error, and we did not interpret it to be clinically meaningful. Ocular inflammation and increased intraocular pressure (IOP) after intravitreal injection were the most frequently reported serious ocular adverse events. Researchers reported endophthalmitis in less than 1% of anti‐VEGF‐treated participants and in no cases among control groups. The occurrence of serious systemic adverse events was comparable across anti‐VEGF‐treated groups and control groups; however, the numbers of events and trial participants may have been insufficient to show a meaningful difference between groups (evidence of low‐ to moderate‐certainty). Investigators rarely measured and reported data on visual function, quality of life, or economic outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Results of this review show the effectiveness of anti‐VEGF agents (pegaptanib, ranibizumab, and bevacizumab) in terms of maintaining visual acuity; studies show that ranibizumab and bevacizumab improved visual acuity in some eyes that received these agents and were equally effective. Available information on the adverse effects of each medication does not suggest a higher incidence of potentially vision‐threatening complications with intravitreous injection of anti‐VEGF agents compared with control interventions; however, clinical trial sample sizes were not sufficient to estimate differences in rare safety outcomes. Future Cochrane Reviews should incorporate research evaluating variable dosing regimens of anti‐VEGF agents, effects of long‐term use, use of combination therapies (e.g. anti‐VEGF treatment plus photodynamic therapy), and other methods of delivering these agents.

Neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is associated with rapid vision loss due to choroidal neovascularization (CNV), leakage, and scarring. Steroids have gained attention in their role for the treatment of neovascular AMD for their antiangiogenic and anti-inflammatory properties.This review aims to examine effects of steroids with antiangiogenic properties in the treatment of neovascular AMD.We searched for trials in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and LILACS on 2 October 2006.We included randomised controlled clinical trials of intra- and peri-ocular steroids in people diagnosed with neovascular AMD.Review authors extracted the data and assessed trial quality independently. We did not pool data since the included studies evaluated difference comparisons.We report the risk of losing three or more lines vision at 12 months - "vision loss". One trial (139 people randomized) reported that a single dose of intravitreal triamcinolone (n = 75) (4 mg) had no significant effect on the risk of vision loss compared to placebo (n = 76). (Risk ratio vision loss 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 1.26). Eyes treated with triamcinolone were more likely to develop cataracts and experience increased intraocular pressure (IOP) compared to untreated eyes. One trial (128 people randomized) reported the effects of anecortave acetate (3 mg (n = 32), 15 mg (n = 33) or 30 mg (n = 33) single dose with retreatment every six months if indicated) compared to placebo (n = 30). Risk ratio vision loss 0.80 (95% CI 0.45 to 1.45) in the 3 mg group, 0.45 (95% CI 0.21 to 0.97) in the 15 mg group and 0.91 (95% CI 0.52 to 1.58) in the 30 mg group. Side effects were similar in all treatment groups with the anecortave group having a slightly higher incidence of foreign body sensation compared to placebo. There was a high loss to follow-up. The final analysis may have been subject to selection bias as participants who were not selected for retreatment, possibly with worsening disease, were excluded. There was also a possibility of type I error due to multiple statistical comparisons. The sample size was estimated on the basis of a single 2-way comparison but three 2-way comparisons were analysed and presented. One trial reported that anecortave acetate (n = 263) (15 mg administered at beginning of study and six months) gave similar results to photodynamic therapy (n = 267) (risk ratio vision loss 1.08, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.29).Overall there is weak evidence as to the benefits and harms of steroids with antiangiogenic properties for treating neovascular AMD with only three published trials of variable quality. Intravitreal triamcinolone injection for neovascular AMD does not appear to prevent severe vision loss and is associated with increased IOP and higher risk of cataract formation. Anecortave acetate 15 mg may have a mild benefit in stabilizing vision, but further better quality evidence is needed. The role of steroids in combination with other treatment modalities is yet to be determined.