Cargando…

Clinical Use of Dexamethasone Implants in Resistant Macular Edema Secondary to Branch Retinal Vascular Occlusion Compared with Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor

OBJECTIVES: Branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) is the second most common type of retinal vascular disorder. Both inflammation and increased vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) levels play important roles in the pathogenesis of macular edema (ME) secondary to BRVO. The aim of this study was t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Eris, Erdem, Perente, Irfan, Erdogan, Gurkan, Seymen, Zeynep, Sucu, Mehmet Emin, Ozkaya, Abdullah, Demircan, Ali, Alkin, Zeynep, Demirok, Ahmet, Artunay, Ozgur
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Kare Publishing 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8842035/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35187425
http://dx.doi.org/10.14744/bej.2019.63835
_version_ 1784650972122841088
author Eris, Erdem
Perente, Irfan
Erdogan, Gurkan
Seymen, Zeynep
Sucu, Mehmet Emin
Ozkaya, Abdullah
Demircan, Ali
Alkin, Zeynep
Demirok, Ahmet
Artunay, Ozgur
author_facet Eris, Erdem
Perente, Irfan
Erdogan, Gurkan
Seymen, Zeynep
Sucu, Mehmet Emin
Ozkaya, Abdullah
Demircan, Ali
Alkin, Zeynep
Demirok, Ahmet
Artunay, Ozgur
author_sort Eris, Erdem
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) is the second most common type of retinal vascular disorder. Both inflammation and increased vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) levels play important roles in the pathogenesis of macular edema (ME) secondary to BRVO. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of 0.7-mg intravitreal dexamethasone implants with continued anti-VEGF treatment in patients with ME secondary to BRVO who were poor responders to at least 6 previous anti-VEGF injections. METHODS: Patients exhibiting an insufficient response to at least 6 ranibizumab treatments and who subsequently underwent a dexamethasone implant were included Group 1. Patients who were at risk for cataract or glaucoma continued treatment with the same drug and were defined as Group 2. The best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) changes at month 2, 4, and 6 were measured. RESULTS: Ninety eyes were evaluated. In Group 1, the mean baseline BCVA of 0.71±0.75 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) improved to 0.53±0.62 logMAR at month 2 (p<.001), 0.67±0.72 logMAR at month 4 (p=0.325), and 1.03±0.83 logMAR at month 6 (p=.001). In Group 2, the mean baseline BCVA was 0.73±0.83 logMAR, and improved to 0.68±0.83 logMAR at month 2 (p=0.12), 0.698±0.81 logMAR at month 4 (p=0.270), and 0.76±0.80 at month 6 (p=0.546). The baseline CMT in each group was 588±176 μm and 545±165 μm, respectively (p=0.248). The mean CMT of Group 1 changed from a baseline measurement of 588±176 μm to 308±132 μm at month 2 (p<.001), 450±195 μm at month 4 (p<.001), and 510±190 μm at month 6 (p<.001). The mean CMT of Group 2 changed from a baseline value of 545±165 μm to 486±162 μm at month 2 (p<.001), 516±168 μm at month 4 (p<.001), and 528±171 μm at month 6 (p=0.037). CONCLUSION: Dexamethasone implants were a more effective treatment for patients with BRVO-related resistant ME than ranibizumab at month 2. However, this positive effect seems to decline rapidly in the long term.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8842035
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Kare Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88420352022-02-18 Clinical Use of Dexamethasone Implants in Resistant Macular Edema Secondary to Branch Retinal Vascular Occlusion Compared with Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Eris, Erdem Perente, Irfan Erdogan, Gurkan Seymen, Zeynep Sucu, Mehmet Emin Ozkaya, Abdullah Demircan, Ali Alkin, Zeynep Demirok, Ahmet Artunay, Ozgur Beyoglu Eye J Original Article OBJECTIVES: Branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) is the second most common type of retinal vascular disorder. Both inflammation and increased vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) levels play important roles in the pathogenesis of macular edema (ME) secondary to BRVO. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of 0.7-mg intravitreal dexamethasone implants with continued anti-VEGF treatment in patients with ME secondary to BRVO who were poor responders to at least 6 previous anti-VEGF injections. METHODS: Patients exhibiting an insufficient response to at least 6 ranibizumab treatments and who subsequently underwent a dexamethasone implant were included Group 1. Patients who were at risk for cataract or glaucoma continued treatment with the same drug and were defined as Group 2. The best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) changes at month 2, 4, and 6 were measured. RESULTS: Ninety eyes were evaluated. In Group 1, the mean baseline BCVA of 0.71±0.75 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) improved to 0.53±0.62 logMAR at month 2 (p<.001), 0.67±0.72 logMAR at month 4 (p=0.325), and 1.03±0.83 logMAR at month 6 (p=.001). In Group 2, the mean baseline BCVA was 0.73±0.83 logMAR, and improved to 0.68±0.83 logMAR at month 2 (p=0.12), 0.698±0.81 logMAR at month 4 (p=0.270), and 0.76±0.80 at month 6 (p=0.546). The baseline CMT in each group was 588±176 μm and 545±165 μm, respectively (p=0.248). The mean CMT of Group 1 changed from a baseline measurement of 588±176 μm to 308±132 μm at month 2 (p<.001), 450±195 μm at month 4 (p<.001), and 510±190 μm at month 6 (p<.001). The mean CMT of Group 2 changed from a baseline value of 545±165 μm to 486±162 μm at month 2 (p<.001), 516±168 μm at month 4 (p<.001), and 528±171 μm at month 6 (p=0.037). CONCLUSION: Dexamethasone implants were a more effective treatment for patients with BRVO-related resistant ME than ranibizumab at month 2. However, this positive effect seems to decline rapidly in the long term. Kare Publishing 2019-04-10 /pmc/articles/PMC8842035/ /pubmed/35187425 http://dx.doi.org/10.14744/bej.2019.63835 Text en Copyright: © 2019 by Beyoglu Eye Training and Research Hospital https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
spellingShingle Original Article
Eris, Erdem
Perente, Irfan
Erdogan, Gurkan
Seymen, Zeynep
Sucu, Mehmet Emin
Ozkaya, Abdullah
Demircan, Ali
Alkin, Zeynep
Demirok, Ahmet
Artunay, Ozgur
Clinical Use of Dexamethasone Implants in Resistant Macular Edema Secondary to Branch Retinal Vascular Occlusion Compared with Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor
title Clinical Use of Dexamethasone Implants in Resistant Macular Edema Secondary to Branch Retinal Vascular Occlusion Compared with Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor
title_full Clinical Use of Dexamethasone Implants in Resistant Macular Edema Secondary to Branch Retinal Vascular Occlusion Compared with Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor
title_fullStr Clinical Use of Dexamethasone Implants in Resistant Macular Edema Secondary to Branch Retinal Vascular Occlusion Compared with Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor
title_full_unstemmed Clinical Use of Dexamethasone Implants in Resistant Macular Edema Secondary to Branch Retinal Vascular Occlusion Compared with Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor
title_short Clinical Use of Dexamethasone Implants in Resistant Macular Edema Secondary to Branch Retinal Vascular Occlusion Compared with Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor
title_sort clinical use of dexamethasone implants in resistant macular edema secondary to branch retinal vascular occlusion compared with intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8842035/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35187425
http://dx.doi.org/10.14744/bej.2019.63835
work_keys_str_mv AT eriserdem clinicaluseofdexamethasoneimplantsinresistantmacularedemasecondarytobranchretinalvascularocclusioncomparedwithintravitrealantivascularendothelialgrowthfactor
AT perenteirfan clinicaluseofdexamethasoneimplantsinresistantmacularedemasecondarytobranchretinalvascularocclusioncomparedwithintravitrealantivascularendothelialgrowthfactor
AT erdogangurkan clinicaluseofdexamethasoneimplantsinresistantmacularedemasecondarytobranchretinalvascularocclusioncomparedwithintravitrealantivascularendothelialgrowthfactor
AT seymenzeynep clinicaluseofdexamethasoneimplantsinresistantmacularedemasecondarytobranchretinalvascularocclusioncomparedwithintravitrealantivascularendothelialgrowthfactor
AT sucumehmetemin clinicaluseofdexamethasoneimplantsinresistantmacularedemasecondarytobranchretinalvascularocclusioncomparedwithintravitrealantivascularendothelialgrowthfactor
AT ozkayaabdullah clinicaluseofdexamethasoneimplantsinresistantmacularedemasecondarytobranchretinalvascularocclusioncomparedwithintravitrealantivascularendothelialgrowthfactor
AT demircanali clinicaluseofdexamethasoneimplantsinresistantmacularedemasecondarytobranchretinalvascularocclusioncomparedwithintravitrealantivascularendothelialgrowthfactor
AT alkinzeynep clinicaluseofdexamethasoneimplantsinresistantmacularedemasecondarytobranchretinalvascularocclusioncomparedwithintravitrealantivascularendothelialgrowthfactor
AT demirokahmet clinicaluseofdexamethasoneimplantsinresistantmacularedemasecondarytobranchretinalvascularocclusioncomparedwithintravitrealantivascularendothelialgrowthfactor
AT artunayozgur clinicaluseofdexamethasoneimplantsinresistantmacularedemasecondarytobranchretinalvascularocclusioncomparedwithintravitrealantivascularendothelialgrowthfactor