|Intravitreal bevacizumab versus triamcinolone acetonide for macular edema due to branch retinal vein occlusion: a matched study|
|Hou Jing; Tao Yong; Jiang Yan-rong; Li Xiao-xin; Gao Lei|
|关键词||bevacizumab branch retinal vein occlusion triamcinolone acetonide|
|刊名||CHINESE MEDICAL JOURNAL|
|WOS标题词||Science & Technology|
|类目[WOS]||Medicine, General & Internal|
|研究领域[WOS]||General & Internal Medicine|
|关键词[WOS]||INTRAOCULAR-PRESSURE ELEVATION ; NEOVASCULAR DISEASES ; SECONDARY ; AVASTIN ; INJECTION|
Background Branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) is a common retinal vascular disorder of the elderly and both intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (TA) and intravitreal bevacizumab were reported to be effective. The purpose of this study was to compare intravitreal bevacizumab with intravitreal TA for the treatment of macular edema resulting from BRVO.
Methods The retrospectively comparative interventional study included a bevacizumab group of 34 BRVO patients (1.25 mg bevacizumab) and a TA group of 34 BRVO patients (4.0 mg TA), and the two groups were matched by baseline best corrected visual acuity (BCVA). Examinations were designed to be carried out at 1 day, 3 days, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year after each injection. The mean follow-up was (148.43 +/- 130.56) days. Main outcome parameters were BCVA and morphometric measurements of the macula obtained by optical coherence tomography.
Results In all follow-ups, the mean changes of BCVA (LogMAR) between two groups were not significantly different (P>0.10). Similarly, the rates of patients who got BCVA improvement >= 2 lines or lost BCVA >= 2 lines were not significantly different, either (P>0.10). In both groups, compared with baseline, the mean central macular thickness (CMT) got reduction from 4 weeks to 1 year after initial injection, however, which lost statistical significance at 6-month follow-up in TA group (P=0.25) and lost significance at 3-month and 6-month follow-up in bevacizumab group (P=0.07, 0.21). The mean CMT between two groups differed at 3-month follow-up (P<0.01), while almost kept parallel in other follow-ups (all P>0.40). In TA group, retinal pigment epithelium tear occurred in 1 eye at 8 weeks after initial injection and 12 eyes (35.3%) got intraocular pressure >21 mmHg. In bevacizumab group, no severe complications were observed.
Conclusion For BRVO, intravitreal bevacizumab versus intravitreal TA causes a similar increase in visual acuity and reduction of macular edema (except 3-month follow-up) with minor complications during 1 year. Chin Med J 2009;122(22):2695-2699
|作者单位||Peking Univ, Peoples Hosp, Dept Ophthalmol, Beijing 100044, Peoples R China|
|Hou Jing,Tao Yong,Jiang Yan-rong,et al. Intravitreal bevacizumab versus triamcinolone acetonide for macular edema due to branch retinal vein occlusion: a matched study[J]. CHINESE MEDICAL JOURNAL,2009,122(22):2695-2699.|
|APA||Hou Jing,Tao Yong,Jiang Yan-rong,Li Xiao-xin,&Gao Lei.(2009).Intravitreal bevacizumab versus triamcinolone acetonide for macular edema due to branch retinal vein occlusion: a matched study.CHINESE MEDICAL JOURNAL,122(22),2695-2699.|
|MLA||Hou Jing,et al."Intravitreal bevacizumab versus triamcinolone acetonide for macular edema due to branch retinal vein occlusion: a matched study".CHINESE MEDICAL JOURNAL 122.22(2009):2695-2699.|