Aflibercept Versus Bevacizumab and/or Ranibizumab for Recurrent Macular Edema Secondary to Central Retinal Vein Occlusion

阿柏西普与贝伐珠单抗和/或雷珠单抗治疗继发于视网膜中央静脉阻塞的复发性黄斑水肿的比较

阅读:1

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare functional and anatomic outcomes of treatment with intravitreal aflibercept versus bevacizumab and/or ranibizumab in patients with recurrent macular edema (ME) secondary to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO). METHODS: Retrospective, comparative case series of patients with recurrent ME in the setting of CRVO. Patients with recurrent ME received treatment with aflibercept (Group 1, G1) or bevacizumab and/or ranibizumab (Group 2, G2). Primary outcome measures were best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central foveal thickness (CFT). RESULTS: Of the 20 eyes (20 patients) with recurrent ME included in the study, 9 received aflibercept (G1) and 11 received bevacizumab and/or ranibizumab (G2). Median BCVA at recurrence of ME and at most recent follow-up was 20/60 (G1) and 20/80 (G2) and 20/40 (G1) and 20/50 (G2, P > 0.05 for all comparisons), respectively. Median CFT at recurrence of ME and at most recent follow-up was 492 μm (G1) and 448 μm (G2) and 291 μm (G1) and 295 μm (G2, P > 0.05 for all comparisons), respectively. Complete resolution of ME for at least 4 months was found in 78% (G1) and 55% (G2) of patients with a median injection free interval of 11 (G1) and 13 (G2) months (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with recurrent ME secondary to CRVO, there was improvement in BCVA and CFT in all groups, although patients treated with aflibercept showed a trend toward better anatomical outcomes decreased need for recurrent injections.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。