首页> 外文期刊>Oman Journal of Ophthalmology >Comparison of intravitreal bevacizumab, intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide, and macular grid augmentation in refractory diffuse diabetic macular edema: A prospective, randomized study
【24h】

Comparison of intravitreal bevacizumab, intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide, and macular grid augmentation in refractory diffuse diabetic macular edema: A prospective, randomized study

机译:玻璃体腔注射贝伐单抗,玻璃体注射曲安奈德和黄斑部网格增强治疗难治性弥漫性糖尿病性黄斑水肿的比较:一项前瞻性随机研究

获取原文
           

摘要

Background:In spite of laser being the gold standard treatment for Diabetic Macular edema (DME), some patients do not respond to laser. Various treatment modalities are being tried in the management of refractory diffuse DME (DDME).Purpose:To compare the efficacy of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB), intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA), and macular grid augmentation in the management of refractory DDME.Settings and Design:Prospective randomized study in a tertiary eye care center.Materials and Methods:Sixty patients with refractory DDME were randomly assigned to three groups: Group 1 received IVB (1.25 mg/0.05 ml), Group 2 received IVTA (4 mg/0.1ml), and Group 3 underwent laser augmentation. Primary outcome measures were best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) at the end of 6 months.Statistics:Analysis was performed using SPSS 14.0Results:Group 1 and 2 showed significant improvement in mean BCVA from 20/160 at baseline to 20/80 and from 20/125 to 20/63, respectively, at 6 months (P < 0.05). These groups also showed a significant reduction in the mean CMT from 457 ± 151 μ at baseline to 316 ± 136 μ and from 394 ± 61 μ to 261 ± 85 μ, respectively, at 6 months (P < 0.05). Group 3 showed only small improvement in mean BCVA from 20/100 to 20/80 (P = 1.0) while mean CMT increased from 358 ± 89 μ at baseline to 395 ± 127 μ at 6 months (P = 0.191). Eight (40%) eyes in Group 2 had intraocular pressure (IOP) rise and 10 (50%) eyes developed cataract.Conclusions:Both IVB and IVTA may be effective in the treatment of refractory DDME compared with macular grid augmentation. IVTA may be associated with side effects such as IOP rise and cataract formation.
机译:背景:尽管激光是治疗糖尿病黄斑水肿(DME)的金标准,但有些患者对激光没有反应。目的:比较玻璃体内贝伐单抗(IVB),玻璃体内曲安奈德(IVTA)和黄斑部增生在治疗难治性DDME中的疗效。设计和方法:在三级眼保健中心进行前瞻性随机研究。材料与方法:将60例难治性DDME患者随机分为三组:第一组接受IVB(1.25 mg / 0.05 ml),第二组接受IVTA(4 mg / 0.1ml) ),第3组接受了激光增强。主要结果指标是在6个月末最佳矫正视力(BCVA)和中央黄斑中心厚度(CMT)。统计:使用SPSS 14.0进行分析结果:第1组和第2组显示,平均BCVA从20/160开始显着改善基线分别在6个月时从20/80和20/125到20/63(P <0.05)。这些组还显示,在6个月时,平均CMT分别从基线的457±151μ显着降低至316±136μ和从394±61μ显着降低至261±85μ(P <0.05)。第3组显示平均BCVA仅从20/100改善到20/80(P = 1.0),而平均CMT从基线时的358±89μ增加到6个月时的395±127μ(P = 0.191)。第2组中有8只眼(40%)的眼内压升高(IOP),有10只眼(50%)发生了白内障。结论:IVB和IVTA都可以治疗难治性DDME。 IVTA可能与诸如IOP升高和白内障形成等副作用有关。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号