Journals / Medicine Science / 2018 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 4

Visual recovery comes after anatomical recovery after intravitreal aflibercept treatment in macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion

Pages
810–812
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Visual recovery comes after anatomical recovery after intravitreal aflibercept injections in patients with naive ME due to BRVO.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:To determine the time of anatomical and visual responses of intravitreal aflibercept (IVA) injections in patients with naive macular edema (ME) due to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO). 54 eyes of 54 patients who had three IVA injections after BRVO were retrospectively studied.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Results: 28 of 54 patients were women and 26 of 54 patients were man.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Visual recovery comes after anatomical recovery after intravitreal aflibercept injections in patients with naive ME due to BRVO.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

To determine the time of anatomical and visual responses of intravitreal aflibercept (IVA) injections in patients with naive macular edema (ME) due to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO). 54 eyes of 54 patients who had three IVA injections after BRVO were retrospectively studied. All of the patients had three monthly IVA injections. SD-OCT was performed at the initial visit and one month after every injection. Changes in central macular thickness (CMT), best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were determined. Results: 28 of 54 patients were women and 26 of 54 patients were man. Mean age was 62.56±2.35 years. Mean BCVA of the patients was logMAR 1.00±0.13 and the mean CMT was 476±35 µm. After first injections; mean BCVA and CMT were improved to logMAR 0.73±0.19, 279±15 µm respectively. These improvements were statically significant (p=0.047 and p=0.000 respectively). After second injections there was not any improvement in BCVA or CMT. The mean BCVA logMAR 0.75±0.18 and mean CMT 279±10 µm (p=0.725 and p=0.991). After third injections mean CMT was 267±6 µm and mean BCVA was logMAR 0.58±0.15. Although after third injections, CMT did not change but BCVA was statically significant improved (p=0.77 and p=0.036 respectively). Visual recovery comes after anatomical recovery after intravitreal aflibercept injections in patients with naive ME due to BRVO.

🔖

Cite This Article

BAYAT, A. H., ERDEN, B., ÇAKIR, A., ÖZTURAN, Ş. G., BÖLÜKBAŞI, S., ELÇİOĞLU, M. N. (2018). Visual recovery comes after anatomical recovery after intravitreal aflibercept treatment in macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion. Medicine Science, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 4, 810–812. https://ajindex.com/articles/277308

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Klein R, Moss SE, Meuer SM, ğo ul, The 15-year cumulative incidence of retinal vein occlusion. The Beaver Dam eye study. Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126:513-8. US Census Bureau. Annual estimates of the population by sex and fiveyear age groups for the United States: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2007. NCEST2007-01. Release Date: May 1, 2008. Available from: https://www. census.gov/prod/2008pubs/p70-117.pdf. Accessed February 16, 2010.
  2. P Hahn, S. Fekrat, Best practices for treatment of retinal vein occlusion, Current Opinion in Ophthalmology. 2012;23:175-81.
  3. Campochiaro PA, Heier JS, Feiner L, et al; BRAVO Investigators. Ranibizumab for macular edema following branch retinal vein occlusion: six-month primary end point results of a phase III study. Ophthalmology. 2010;117:1102-12.
  4. Hikichi T, Higuchi M, Matsushita T. et al. Two-year outcomes of intravitreal bevacizumab therapy for macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion Br J Ophthalmology. 2014;98:195-9.
  5. MA Leitritz, F. Gelisken, F Ziemssen, et al. Grid laser photocoagulation for macular edema due to branch retinal vein occlusion in the age of bevacizumab? Results of a prospective study with crossover design, Br Ophthalmology. 2013;97:215-9.
  6. SJ. Ahn, J Ahn, SJ.Woo, et al. Initial dose of three monthly intravitreal injections versus PRN intravitreal injections of bevacizumab for macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion. BioMed Res Int. 2013;2013: 209735 Hayashi A, Yunoki T, Miyakoshi A, Intravitreal injection of bevacizumab combined with macular grid laser photocoagulation for macular edema in branch retinal vein occlusion. J Ophthalmology. 2011;6:625-31.
  7. Wu L, Arevalo JF, Roca JA, Comparison of two doses of intravitreal bevacizumab (Avastin) for treatment of macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion: results from the Pan-American Collaborative Retina Study Group at 6 months of follow-up. Retina. 2008;28:212-9.
  8. Sakanishi Y, Lee A, Usui-Ouchi A, et al. Twelve-month outcomes in patients with retinal vein occlusion treated with low-frequency intravitreal ranibizumab. Clin Ophthalmol. 2016;10:1161-5.
  9. Campochiaro PA, Wykoff CC, Singer M, et al. Monthly versus as-needed ranibizumab injections in patients with retinal vein occlusion: the SHORE study. Ophthalmology. 2014;121:2432-42.
  10. Brown DM, Campochiaro PA, Bhisitkul RB, et al. Sustained benefits from ranibizumab for macular edema following branch retinal vein occlusion: 12-month outcomes of a phase III study. Ophthalmology. 2011