Journals / Retina-Vitreus / 2013 / Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 4

Comparison of sub-tenon triamcinolone acetonide and ıntravitreal bevacizumab for the treatment of macular edema due to branch retinal vein occlusion

Retina ven dal tıkanıklığına bağlı maküler ödem tedavisinde subtenon triamsinolon asetonid ve intravitreal bevacizumabın karşılaştırılması

Pages
254–258
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)

However the effect of IVB on the macular edema seems better than STA.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose: To evaluate the effect of subtenon triamcinolone acetonide (STA) and intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injections in the treatment of macular edema due to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, 41 eyes of 41 patients with macular edema due to BRVO were includ- ed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:However the effect of IVB on the macular edema seems better than STA.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of subtenon triamcinolone acetonide (STA) and intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injections in the treatment of macular edema due to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO). Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, 41 eyes of 41 patients with macular edema due to BRVO were includ- ed. The records of 21 patients of triamcinolone and 20 patients of bevacizumab group were analyzed retrospectively. Before injection and 1., 3. and 6 months after the treatment, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) (logMAR), intraocular pressure (IOP) and central foveal thickness (CFT) detected by optical coherence tomography were recorded. Results: In the triamcinolone group baseline values including BCVA (logMAR) and CFT were 0.94±0.42 logMAR and 552±70 μm. In the bevacizumab group, they were 0.98±0.50 logMAR and 541±94 μm. At 6th month BCVA and CFT were 0.57±0.35 logMAR and 342±34 μm in the triamcinolone group whereas these values were 0.41±0.23 logMAR and 289±15μm in the bevacizumab group. During the follow up, the mean BCVA was not significantly different but the mean CFT was significantly different at 3rd and 6th month between groups. Five patients (23.8%) from triamcinolone group, IOP exceeded 24 mm Hg postoperatively. No complications observed in the bevacizumab group. Conclusion: The visual outcome of STA and IVB injections in patients with macular edema due to BRVO was similar. In- creased IOP after injection limits the usage of STA. However the effect of IVB on the macular edema seems better than STA.

Özet

Amaç: Retina ven dal tıkanıklığına (RVDT) bağlı oluşan maküla ödemi tedavisinde subtenon triamsinolon asetonid (STA) ve intravitreal bevacizumab (İVB) enjeksiyonlarının etkinliğinin değerlendirilmesi. Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu retrospektif çalışmada RVDT’ye bağlı maküla ödemi gelişen 41 hastanın 41 gözü çalışmaya dahil edildi. Subtenon triamsinolon asetonid yapılan 21 olgu ve İVB yapılan 20 olgunun kart bilgileri geriye dönük incelendi. Hastaların tedavi öncesi ve 1. 3. ve 6. ayda en iyi düzeltilmiş görme keskinliği (EİDGK), (logMAR), göz içi basınçları ve optik koherens tomografi ile saptanan merkezi fovea kalınlığı (MFK) kaydedildi. Bulgular: Triamsinolon grubunda hastaların enjeksiyon öncesi ortalama EİDGK ve MFK değerleri sırasıyla 0.94±0.42 logMAR ve 552±70 μm idi. Bevacizumab grubunda bu değerler 0.98±0.50 logMAR ve 541±94 μm idi. Altıncı ayda triamsino- lon grubunda ortalama EİDGK ve MFK sırasıyla 0.57±0.35 logMAR ve 342±34 μm iken bevacizumab grubunda 0.41±0.23 logMAR ve 289±15μm idi. Gruplar arasında tüm takiplerde ortalama EİDGK açısından fark saptanmazken, 3. ve 6. aylarda ortalama MFK açısından istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark vardı (p<0.05). Triamsinolon grubunda 5 (%23.8) olguda enjek- siyon sonrası göz içi basıncı (GİB) 24 mmHg’nin üzerinde saptandı. Bevacizumab grubunda herhangi bir komplikasyon görülmedi. Sonuç: Retina ven dal tıkanıklığına bağlı maküla ödeminde STA ve İVB uygulamalarının görsel başarısı benzerdir. En- jeksiyon sonrası GİB artışı STA kullanımını sınırlamaktadır. İVB’nin STA’ya göre maküla ödemini azaltmada daha etkili olduğu gözükmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

İLHAN, N., AYHAN, E. T., DAĞLIOĞLU, M. C., COŞKUN, M., İLHAN, Ö., AYINTAP, E., KESKİN, U. (2013). Comparison of sub-tenon triamcinolone acetonide and ıntravitreal bevacizumab for the treatment of macular edema due to branch retinal vein occlusion. Retina-Vitreus, Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 4, 254–258. https://ajindex.com/articles/308052

References (14)

  1. Salinas-Alamán A, Zarranz-Ventura J, Caire González-Jauregui JM, et al. Intravitreal bevacizumab associated with grid laser photocoagulation in macular edema secondary to branch reti- nal vein occlusion. Eur J Ophthalmol 2011;21:434-9
  2. Rehak J, Rehak M. Branch retinal vein occlusion: pathogenesis, visual prognosis, and treatment modalities. Curr Eye Res 2008;33:111-31
  3. Demir M, Oba E, Gulkilik G, et al. Intravitreal bevacizumab for macular edema due to branch retinal vein occlusion: 12-month re- sults. Clin Ophthalmol 2011;5:745-9
  4. Noma H, Minamoto A, Funatsu H, et al. Intravitreal levels of vas- cular endothelial growth factor and interleukin-6 are correlated with macular edema in branch retinal vein occlusion. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2006; 244: 309-15
  5. Guthoff R, Meigen T, Hennemann K, et al. Comparison of bevaci- zumab and triamcinolone for treatment of macular edema second- ary to branch retinal vein occlusion in a pair-matched analysis. Ophthalmologica 2010;224:319-24
  6. Russo V, Barone A, Conte E, et al. Bevacizumab compared with macular laser grid photocoagulation for cystoid macular ede- ma in branch retinal vein occlusion. Retina 2009;29:511-5
  7. Uçgun Nİ, Önen M, Fikret CZ ve ark. Retina ven tıkanıklığına bağlı makula ödemi tedavisinde posterior subtenon triamsinolon asetonid. Ret-Vit 2004;12:180-3
  8. Ozdek S, Deren YT, Gurelik G, et al. Posterior subtenon triam- cinolone, intravitreal triamcinolone and grid laser photocoagula- tion for the treatment of macular edema in branch retinal vein occlusion. Ophthalmic Res 2008;40:26-31
  9. Haller JA, Bandello F, Belfort R Jr, et al. Randomized, sham- controlled trial of dexamethasone intravitreal implant in patients with macular edema due to retinal vein occlusion. Ophthalmol- ogy 2010;117:1134-46
  10. Silva RM, Faria de Abreu JR, Cunha-Vaz JG. Blood-retina bar- rier in acute retinal branch vein occlusion. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1995;233:721-6
  11. Estrick E, Subramanian ML, Heier JS, et al. Multiple laser treat- ments for macular edema attributable to branch retinal vein oc- clusion. Am J Ophthalmol 2005;139:653-7
  12. Hayreh SS, Rubenstein L, Podhajsky P. Argon laser scatter pho- tocoagulation in treatment of branch retinal vein occlusion: a pro- spective trial. Ophthalmologica 1993;206:1-14
  13. Kiernan DF, Mieler WF. The use of intraocular corticosteroids. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2009;10:2511-25
  14. Martidis A, Duker JS, Greenberg PB, et al. Intravitreal triam-