Cargando…
Intravitreal dexamethasone implant versus triamcinolone acetonide for macular oedema of central retinal vein occlusion: quantifying efficacy and safety
PURPOSE: Among the retinal vascular diseases, burden of retinal vein occlusion is most common immediately after diabetic retinopathy. Intravitreal corticosteroids are gaining popularity in managing macular edema (ME) of RVO. Our study compares efficacy and safety of intravitreal triamcinolone (IVTA)...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5883339/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29632703 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40942-018-0114-2 |
_version_ | 1783311629852606464 |
---|---|
author | Mishra, S. K. Gupta, A. Patyal, S. Kumar, S. Raji, K. Singh, A. Sharma, V. |
author_facet | Mishra, S. K. Gupta, A. Patyal, S. Kumar, S. Raji, K. Singh, A. Sharma, V. |
author_sort | Mishra, S. K. |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Among the retinal vascular diseases, burden of retinal vein occlusion is most common immediately after diabetic retinopathy. Intravitreal corticosteroids are gaining popularity in managing macular edema (ME) of RVO. Our study compares efficacy and safety of intravitreal triamcinolone (IVTA) and dexamethasone implant (IVD) over 6 months. METHODS: This comparative, prospective, randomized study on 40 patients of non-ischemic central RVO with significant ME (> 330 μm) of < 3 months duration. Study was done at Army Research Hospital between Sep-2012 and May-2014 in accordance to Helsinki Declaration. IVD group (n = 20) received Ozurdex(®) while IVTA group (n = 20) received triamcinolone-acetonide (4 mg/0.1 ml), followed up at day-1 and weeks 4, 8, 12, 24. RESULTS: At 6 months, mean improvement in best corrected visual acuity and retinal thickness (CMT) in the IVD group was 0.43 logmar and 323 μm and in IVTA group was 0.49 logmar and 322 μm respectively. Proportion of patients achieving ≥ 15 letters was about 40% in both groups. IOP rise was significantly higher in IVTA group at 12 and 24 weeks. In IVTA group ≥ 10 mmHg IOP rise was seen in 60% of patients, 41.6% among them had > 35 mmHg and 66% needed combination treatment and failed to reach baseline line IOP at 6 months. In IVD group, 5 pts had IOP rise with all being < 26 mmHg and were easily managed with single agent with IOP reaching baseline by 6th month in all pts. Relative risk of IOP rise with IVTA is 2.4 times higher compared to IVD. Cataract progression and cataract surgeries were required at significantly higher rates in IVTA group. In IVTA group, cataract progression was seen in 35% patients, with 71.5% requiring cataract surgery at 6 months. IVD group, 10% patients had cataract progression while none required surgery at 6 months. Relative risk of cataract progression with IVTA is 3.5 times higher compared to IVD. CONCLUSION: Intravitreal steroids are effective in managing macular edema of retinal vein occlusion, while newer formulation of sustained release dexamethasone implant is significantly safer than IVTA. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5883339 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58833392018-04-09 Intravitreal dexamethasone implant versus triamcinolone acetonide for macular oedema of central retinal vein occlusion: quantifying efficacy and safety Mishra, S. K. Gupta, A. Patyal, S. Kumar, S. Raji, K. Singh, A. Sharma, V. Int J Retina Vitreous Original Article PURPOSE: Among the retinal vascular diseases, burden of retinal vein occlusion is most common immediately after diabetic retinopathy. Intravitreal corticosteroids are gaining popularity in managing macular edema (ME) of RVO. Our study compares efficacy and safety of intravitreal triamcinolone (IVTA) and dexamethasone implant (IVD) over 6 months. METHODS: This comparative, prospective, randomized study on 40 patients of non-ischemic central RVO with significant ME (> 330 μm) of < 3 months duration. Study was done at Army Research Hospital between Sep-2012 and May-2014 in accordance to Helsinki Declaration. IVD group (n = 20) received Ozurdex(®) while IVTA group (n = 20) received triamcinolone-acetonide (4 mg/0.1 ml), followed up at day-1 and weeks 4, 8, 12, 24. RESULTS: At 6 months, mean improvement in best corrected visual acuity and retinal thickness (CMT) in the IVD group was 0.43 logmar and 323 μm and in IVTA group was 0.49 logmar and 322 μm respectively. Proportion of patients achieving ≥ 15 letters was about 40% in both groups. IOP rise was significantly higher in IVTA group at 12 and 24 weeks. In IVTA group ≥ 10 mmHg IOP rise was seen in 60% of patients, 41.6% among them had > 35 mmHg and 66% needed combination treatment and failed to reach baseline line IOP at 6 months. In IVD group, 5 pts had IOP rise with all being < 26 mmHg and were easily managed with single agent with IOP reaching baseline by 6th month in all pts. Relative risk of IOP rise with IVTA is 2.4 times higher compared to IVD. Cataract progression and cataract surgeries were required at significantly higher rates in IVTA group. In IVTA group, cataract progression was seen in 35% patients, with 71.5% requiring cataract surgery at 6 months. IVD group, 10% patients had cataract progression while none required surgery at 6 months. Relative risk of cataract progression with IVTA is 3.5 times higher compared to IVD. CONCLUSION: Intravitreal steroids are effective in managing macular edema of retinal vein occlusion, while newer formulation of sustained release dexamethasone implant is significantly safer than IVTA. BioMed Central 2018-03-26 /pmc/articles/PMC5883339/ /pubmed/29632703 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40942-018-0114-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Mishra, S. K. Gupta, A. Patyal, S. Kumar, S. Raji, K. Singh, A. Sharma, V. Intravitreal dexamethasone implant versus triamcinolone acetonide for macular oedema of central retinal vein occlusion: quantifying efficacy and safety |
title | Intravitreal dexamethasone implant versus triamcinolone acetonide for macular oedema of central retinal vein occlusion: quantifying efficacy and safety |
title_full | Intravitreal dexamethasone implant versus triamcinolone acetonide for macular oedema of central retinal vein occlusion: quantifying efficacy and safety |
title_fullStr | Intravitreal dexamethasone implant versus triamcinolone acetonide for macular oedema of central retinal vein occlusion: quantifying efficacy and safety |
title_full_unstemmed | Intravitreal dexamethasone implant versus triamcinolone acetonide for macular oedema of central retinal vein occlusion: quantifying efficacy and safety |
title_short | Intravitreal dexamethasone implant versus triamcinolone acetonide for macular oedema of central retinal vein occlusion: quantifying efficacy and safety |
title_sort | intravitreal dexamethasone implant versus triamcinolone acetonide for macular oedema of central retinal vein occlusion: quantifying efficacy and safety |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5883339/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29632703 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40942-018-0114-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mishrask intravitrealdexamethasoneimplantversustriamcinoloneacetonideformacularoedemaofcentralretinalveinocclusionquantifyingefficacyandsafety AT guptaa intravitrealdexamethasoneimplantversustriamcinoloneacetonideformacularoedemaofcentralretinalveinocclusionquantifyingefficacyandsafety AT patyals intravitrealdexamethasoneimplantversustriamcinoloneacetonideformacularoedemaofcentralretinalveinocclusionquantifyingefficacyandsafety AT kumars intravitrealdexamethasoneimplantversustriamcinoloneacetonideformacularoedemaofcentralretinalveinocclusionquantifyingefficacyandsafety AT rajik intravitrealdexamethasoneimplantversustriamcinoloneacetonideformacularoedemaofcentralretinalveinocclusionquantifyingefficacyandsafety AT singha intravitrealdexamethasoneimplantversustriamcinoloneacetonideformacularoedemaofcentralretinalveinocclusionquantifyingefficacyandsafety AT sharmav intravitrealdexamethasoneimplantversustriamcinoloneacetonideformacularoedemaofcentralretinalveinocclusionquantifyingefficacyandsafety |