...
首页> 外文期刊>Investigative ophthalmology & visual science >Comparison of Two Treatment Schedules of Intravitreal Ranibizumab for Neovascular Age Related Macular Degeneration
【24h】

Comparison of Two Treatment Schedules of Intravitreal Ranibizumab for Neovascular Age Related Macular Degeneration

机译:玻璃体腔注射雷珠单抗治疗新血管性年龄相关性黄斑变性的两种治疗方案的比较

获取原文
           

摘要

Purpose: : To compare the outcomes of two treatment protocols for neovascular age related macular degeneration: Loading dose (3+PRN) versus PRN dosing from baseline. Methods: : This retrospective study assessed 78 consecutive patients (78 eyes) with visual acuity between 24 and 73 letters due to all subtypes of neovascular age related macular degeneration treated with ranibizumab and followed up for twelve months. The patients were divided into two treatment groups: I) 3+PRN consisting of three initial injections at monthly intervals followed by OCT guided retreatment and II) a pro re nata-PRN dosing schedule with OCT guided retreatment criteria from start of therapy. The main outcome measures compared in the two treatment groups were change in visual acuity (VA) and central macular thickness (CMT). Results: : The mean VA at baseline was 48?± 15.25 and 44.48 ?± 15.41 ETDRS letters in the 3+prn and prn group respectively. In the 3+ prn group (n=47), 89.01% and in the prn group(n=31) 93.1% maintained stable vision. However 29% had more than 15 letter improvements in the 3+prn group compared with 12.9% in prn group (p=0.04). The mean change in VA at 12 month of +6.4 in the 3+prn and +3.9 in the prn group (p=0.35). The mean change in CMT at 12 months was -37.5 in the 3+prn and-43.5 prn group respectively (p=0.6).The mean number of ranibizumab injections was 6.0 in the 3+prn group and 4.5 in the prn group. Conclusions: : More patients achieved visual improvement in the 3+prn group compared to the prn group, even though there was no significant difference in the CMT. This suggests the superiority of the 3+prn schedule over the prn group.
机译:目的::比较两种针对新血管性年龄相关性黄斑变性的治疗方案的结果:负荷剂量(3 + PRN)与基线时的PRN剂量。方法::这项回顾性研究评估了兰尼单抗治疗后的78例连续视力(24眼至73眼)的视力在24至73个字母之间的患者,这些患者均由兰尼单抗治疗,并随访了十二个月。将患者分为两个治疗组:I)3 + PRN,每三个月进行一次初次注射,然后进行OCT指导的再治疗; II)从治疗开始就按照OCT指导的再治疗标准制定PRNA的PRN剂量。在两个治疗组中比较的主要结局指标是视力(VA)和黄斑中心厚度(CMT)的变化。结果:3 + prn和prn组的基线平均VA分别为48?±15.25和44.48?±15.41 ETDRS字母。在3+ prn组(n = 47)中,89.01%和在prn组(n = 31)中93.1%保持稳定的视力。然而,3 + prn组中29%的字母改善超过15个,而prn组中12.9%(p = 0.04)。 3 + prn组在12个月时的VA平均变化为+ 6.4,prn组为+3.9(p = 0.35)。 3 + prn组和43.5prn组在12个月时CMT的平均变化分别为-37.5(p = 0.6).3 + prn组中兰尼单抗的平均注射次数为6.0和prn组为4.5。结论:3 + prn组与prn组相比,更多的患者获得了视觉改善,即使CMT没有明显差异。这表明3 + PRN计划优于PRN组。

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