Comparison of anti-vascular endothelial growth factors, laser treatments and a combination of the both for treatment of central retinal vein occlusion

AIM:To compare changes in visual acuity and macular edema in patients with central retinal vein occlusion(CRVO)treated with intravitreal injections of bevacizumab,macular grid photocoagulation combined with pan retinal photocoagulation(PRP),or both(bevacizumab+grid+PRP).· METHODS:Our study is a retr...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inInternational journal of ophthalmology Vol. 9; no. 3; pp. 431 - 433
Main Authors Pikkel, Yoav Y, Sharabi-Nov, Adi, Beiran, Itzchak, Pikkel, Joseph
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published China International Journal of Ophthalmology Press 18.03.2016
Press of International Journal of Ophthalmology (IJO PRESS)
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:AIM:To compare changes in visual acuity and macular edema in patients with central retinal vein occlusion(CRVO)treated with intravitreal injections of bevacizumab,macular grid photocoagulation combined with pan retinal photocoagulation(PRP),or both(bevacizumab+grid+PRP).· METHODS:Our study is a retrospective cohort clinical study that examined patients that suffered from ischemic CRVO with macular edema.Study inclusion criteria were ischemic CRVO with macula edema and the availability of complete medical records for at least 12 mo after treatment.Excluded were patients with diabetes or any other retinal disease.We reviewed the medical records of patients treated in one ophthalmology departmentcomparing changes in visual acuity and macular edema in patients treated with intravitreal injections of bevacizumab vs those that were treated with macular grid photocoagulation and PRP or both.The main outcome measures were the differences in best corrected visual acuity(BCVA) and in macular thickness,as assessed by optical coherence tomography,between the enrollment and the final follow up visits.· RESULTS:Sixty-five patients met inclusion criteria.There were no statistically significant differences among the three groups in the mean changes in macular thickness as measured by ocular coherence tomography(131.5±41.2,108.6±29.2,and 121.1±121.1,P=0.110),or in visual acuity(0.128±0.077,0.088±0.057,and 0.095±0.065),for intravitreal injections,macular grid photocoagulation+PRP and a combination of the treatments,respectively,P =0.111.The proportions of patients with macular edema after treatment were:26.1%,28.6%,and 14.3%,respectively,P=0.499.· CONCLUSION:Similar benefit was observed for intravitreal injections,laser photocoagulation,or a combined regimen in the treatment of CRVO.A nonstatistically significant trend for reduction in macular edema was observed following combined treatment.
Bibliography:bevacizumab; grid laser photocoagulation;macular edema; optical coherence tomography; retinal veinocclusion
AIM:To compare changes in visual acuity and macular edema in patients with central retinal vein occlusion(CRVO)treated with intravitreal injections of bevacizumab,macular grid photocoagulation combined with pan retinal photocoagulation(PRP),or both(bevacizumab+grid+PRP).· METHODS:Our study is a retrospective cohort clinical study that examined patients that suffered from ischemic CRVO with macular edema.Study inclusion criteria were ischemic CRVO with macula edema and the availability of complete medical records for at least 12 mo after treatment.Excluded were patients with diabetes or any other retinal disease.We reviewed the medical records of patients treated in one ophthalmology departmentcomparing changes in visual acuity and macular edema in patients treated with intravitreal injections of bevacizumab vs those that were treated with macular grid photocoagulation and PRP or both.The main outcome measures were the differences in best corrected visual acuity(BCVA) and in macular thickness,as assessed by optical coherence tomography,between the enrollment and the final follow up visits.· RESULTS:Sixty-five patients met inclusion criteria.There were no statistically significant differences among the three groups in the mean changes in macular thickness as measured by ocular coherence tomography(131.5±41.2,108.6±29.2,and 121.1±121.1,P=0.110),or in visual acuity(0.128±0.077,0.088±0.057,and 0.095±0.065),for intravitreal injections,macular grid photocoagulation+PRP and a combination of the treatments,respectively,P =0.111.The proportions of patients with macular edema after treatment were:26.1%,28.6%,and 14.3%,respectively,P=0.499.· CONCLUSION:Similar benefit was observed for intravitreal injections,laser photocoagulation,or a combined regimen in the treatment of CRVO.A nonstatistically significant trend for reduction in macular edema was observed following combined treatment.
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:2222-3959
2227-4898
DOI:10.18240/ijo.2016.03.18