Intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide versus combined intravitreal bevacizumab and dexamethasone in diffuse diabetic macular oedema

Background: To compare the efficacy of a single injection of combined intravitreal dexamethasone and bevacizumab (Avastin) with that of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide in eyes with diffuse cystoid diabetic macular oedema. Design: Prospective, non‐randomized, masked, interventional case series. Participants: Twenty‐four eyes of 24 subjects with centre‐involved diabetic macular oedema extending over two disc‐areas with predominant cystic changes on spectral domain optical coherence tomography were selected. Methods: Ten phakic and two pseudophakic, ocular hypertensive eyes received intravitreal dexamethasone and bevacizumab as against 12 pseudophakic, normotensive eyes that received intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide. Main Outcome Measures: Change in central macular volume on spectral domain optical coherence tomography and best‐corrected visual acuity were measured at 6‐week follow‐up. Results: Baseline data were matched in both groups. Post‐injection central macular volume (7.46 ± 0.73 mm³) was significantly lower (P < 0.001) in the intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide group when compared with its pre‐injection central macular volume (9.11 ± 1.0 mm³) or when compared with the post‐injection central macular volume (P = 0.02) of the intravitreal dexamethasone and bevacizumab group (8.42 ± 1.18 mm³). However, post‐injection best‐corrected visual acuity between the intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (0.65 ± 0.15 logMAR) and the intravitreal dexamethasone and bevacizumab groups (0.685 ± 0.15 logMAR) was not significantly different (P = 0.06) at 6 weeks. No significant correlation was noted between change in central macular volume and change in best‐corrected visual acuity (r = 0.35, P = 0.07) from the pooled data of both the groups. A fair correlation was noted between change in central macular volume and pre‐injection central macular volume (r = 0.55, P = 0.005). Conclusions: Intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide may be more effective than intravitreal dexamethasone and bevacizumab in reducing macular volume in patients with diffuse cystoid diabetic macular oedema. A significant reduction in macular volume does not necessarily translate into a correspondingly significant improvement in best‐corrected visual acuity.     

Matrix γ-carboxyglutamate protein and Fetuin-A, in wet type age-related macular degeneration

AIM:To compare therapeutic effects of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) versus intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injections for bilateral diffuse diabetic macular edema (DDME).METHODS: Forty eyes of 20 patients with bilateral DDME participated in this study. For each patient, 4 mg/0.1 mL IVTA was injected to one eye and 2.5 mg/0.1 mL IVB was injected to the other eye. The effects of injection for diabetic macular edema (DME) were evaluated using best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT) by optical coherence tomography (OCT) and intraocular pressure (IOP) by applanation tonometer. Patients underwent eye examinations, including BCVA, CMT, and IOP at pre-injection, 1, 4, 8, 12 and 24wk after injection. During the follow-up, second injections were performed to eyes which have CMT greater than 400 µm at 12wk for salvage therapy.RESULTS: BCVA (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) at pre-injection, 1, 4, 8, 12 and 24wk after injection was 0.71±0.19, 0.62±0.23, 0.63±0.12, 0.63±0.13, 0.63±0.14 and 0.61±0.24 in the IVTA group and 0.68±0.25, 0.61±0.22, 0.60±0.24, 0.62±0.25, 0.65±0.26 and 0.59±0.25 in the IVB group, respectively. CMT (μm) at pre-injection, 1, 4, 8, 12 and 24wk after injection was 544±125, 383±96, 335±87, 323±87, 333±92, 335±61 in the IVTA group and 514±100, 431±86, 428±107, 442±106, 478±112, 430±88 in the IVB group respectively. Reduction ratios of mean CMT were 29% at 1wk, 38% at 4wk, 40% at 8wk, 38% at 12wk, and 38% at 24wk in the IVTA group. Second IVTA injections were performed to the 6 eyes (30%) at 12wk. Reduction ratios of mean CMT were 16% at 1wk, 17% at 4wk, 14% at 8wk, 7% at 12wk, and 16% at 24wk in the IVB group. Second IVB injections were performed to the 15 eyes (75%) at 12wk.CONCLUSION:This study showed earlier and more frequent macular edema recurrences in the eyes treated with bevacizumab compared with the ones treated with triamcinolone acetonide. Triamcinolone acetonide was found to provide more efficient and long-standing effect in terms of reducing CMT compared with the bevacizumab.     

Dosage dependency of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide as treatment for diabetic macular oedema

AIM: To evaluate the effect of different doses of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide on diffuse diabetic macular oedema. METHODS: The prospective, randomised, double masked, clinical interventional study included 27 eyes (27 patients) with diffuse diabetic macular oedema. They were randomly divided into three study groups receiving an intravitreal injection of filtered triamcinolone acetonide of about 2 mg (n = 8 eyes), 5 mg (n = 10), or 13 mg (n = 9), respectively. Dosage measurement was performed before filtration. Mean follow up was 6.6 (SD 2.4) months (3-12 months). Main outcome measures were visual acuity and intraocular pressure. RESULTS: Maximal increase in visual acuity was significantly (p = 0.046; 95% CI: 0.032 to 2.99; r = 0.38) correlated with the dosage of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide. Additionally, the duration of the effect of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide increased significantly with the dosage of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (r = 0.45; p = 0.014). Increase in intraocular pressure during follow up was statistically not significantly associated with the dosage used (p = 0.77). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with diffuse diabetic macular oedema receiving intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide, treatment response may last longer and be more pronounced with a dosage of 13 mg than in lower doses of 5 mg or 2 mg. Triamcinolone acetonide induced increase in intraocular pressure may not be markedly associated with the dosage used.     

Macular function after intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection for diabetic macular oedema

Purpose: We aimed to evaluate the effect of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) on macular function in patients with diabetic macular oedema (DMO). Methods: Eleven eyes in 11 patients with DMO were enrolled. In each eye, at baseline and at 30 days after IVTA injection, logMAR visual acuity (VA), macular sensitivity, fixation stability and fixation location by MP‐1 microperimetry and optical coherence tomography (OCT) foveal thickness were assessed. Results: Thirty days after IVTA injection, eyes with DMO showed a significant (p < 0.001) reduction in foveal thickness and significant (p < 0.01) increases in logMAR VA and MP‐1 retinal sensitivity (p < 0.001). There was also significant (p = 0.046) improvement in fixation location and some improvement in fixation stability, although the latter was not significant (p = 0.08). Conclusions: In eyes with DMO, short‐term improvement in retinal sensitivity and fixation properties can be achieved by IVTA injection.     

玻璃体腔注射曲氨奈德与bevacizumab 治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿疗效比较

目的 对比分析玻璃体腔注射曲氨奈德(TA)与抗血管内皮生长因子单克隆抗体(bevacizumab)治疗糖尿病黄斑水肿(DME)的临床疗效.方法 经眼科常规检查和光学相干断层扫描(OCT)检查确诊,共68例82只眼DME患者纳入观察.患者被分成两组进行玻璃体腔注射TA(4mg/0.1ml)或bevacizumab(1.25mg/0.05ml)治疗.TA组37例45只眼,bevaicizumab组31例37只眼,两组在年龄、糖尿病病程、黄斑水肿病程、最佳矫正视力(BCVA)、中心视网膜厚度(CMT)、眼压等方面均无显著差异.比较治疗后4、8、12周两组间BCVA、CMT、眼压的改变.结果 TA组与bevacizumab组在治疗后4 周、8周、12周时视力差异无统计学意义(t=-0.316,0.896、0.879,P=0.754、0.389、0.384).治疗后4周、12周时,TA组比bevacizumab组黄斑水肿有显著下降(t=-1.892、-3.007,P=0.036、0.004),8周时差异无统计学意义(t=-0.362,P=0.722).眼压在治疗后8周、12周时两组差异有统计学意义(t=2.334、2.600,P=0.026、0.015),TA组眼压明显高于bevacizumab组.结论 玻璃体腔注射TA比bevacizumab更早、更有效地降低糖尿病黄斑水肿,并且维持时间更长,此结果还需大样本、多中心的临床随机对照研究.     

Systematic review of intravitreal bevacizumab injection for treatment of primary diabetic macular oedema

Purpose: To compare intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injection versus macular photocoagulation (MPC) or a combination of intravitreal bevacizumab and intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVB/IVTA) injection in improving visual acuity (VA) of patients with primary diabetic macular oedema (DMO). Methods: The following databases were searched: Medline (1950 – December week 3, 2009), The Cochrane Library (Issue 4, 2009), EMBASE (up to 24 December 2009), and the TRIP database (up to 23 December 2009), using no language or other limits. Randomized controlled trials were included that consisted of patients with primary DMO (not with refractory DMO), those comparing IVB injection with MPC or IVB/IVTA injection, those reporting VA outcomes, and those having a minimum follow‐up of 6 weeks. Results: In the four randomized clinical trials comparing IVB injection with MPC, IVB injection demonstrated significantly greater improvement in VA at 6 weeks, but not at 12 weeks. In the three randomized clinical trials comparing IVB injection with IVB/IVTA, IVB injection demonstrated greater improvement in VA at 6 weeks but the benefit was again no longer significant at 12 weeks. No adjunctive effect of IVTA was demonstrated. Conclusions: Intravitreal bevacizumab injection is effective in improving VA in patients with primary DMO for 6 weeks, but the benefits are no longer present 12 weeks following the injection.     

Comparison of the short-term effects of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide and bevacizumab injection for diabetic macular edema

Purpose

To compare the short-term effects of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) with those of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injection for diabetic macular edema (DME).

Methods

The present retrospective, comparative case study included 58 eyes of 35 consecutive patients (IVTA group, 20 eyes; IVB group, 38 eyes) with DME. IVTA (4 mg) or IVB (1.25 mg) injection was performed under local anesthesia. The effects of injection for DME were evaluated using best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT) by optical coherence tomography and intraocular pressure (IOP) by applanation tonometer. Patients underwent eye examinations, including BCVA, CMT, and IOP at pre-injection, 2, 4, and 8 weeks after injection.

Results

BCVA (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) ± SD at pre-injection, 2, 4, and 8 weeks after injection was 0.67 ± 0.40, 0.56 ± 0.35 (p = 0.033), 0.55 ± 0.33 (p = 0.041), and 0.43 ± 0.31 (p = 0.001) in the IVTA group and 0.51 ± 0.31, 0.42 ± 0.26 (p = 0.003), 0.43 ± 0.32 (p = 0.001), and 0.43 ± 0.27 (p = 0.015) in the IVB group, respectively. CMT (µm) ± SD at pre-injection, 2, 4, and 8 weeks after injection was 400.4 ± 94.9, 332.8 ± 47.4 (p = 0.002), 287.5 ± 49.1 (p = 0.007), and 282.5 ± 49.6 (p = 0.043) in the IVTA group and 372.6 ± 99.5, 323.2 ± 72.4 (p = 0.077), 360.9 ± 50.3 (p = 0.668), 368.2 ± 88.6 (p = 0.830) in the IVB group, respectively.

Conclusions

The effects of IVTA for BCVA were more favorable than were those of IVB and were consistent throughout the eight weeks after injection. IVTA significantly reduced CMT during the eight weeks after injection, while IVB did not.     

Intravitreal injection of crystalline triamcinolone acetonide in the treatment of diffuse diabetic macular oedema

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the clinical outcome of an intravitreal injection of crystalline triamcinolone acetonide as treatment of clinically significant diffuse diabetic macular oedema. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 8 patients (10 eyes) who received an intravitreal injection of 25 mg crystalline triamcinolone acetonide as treatment of clinically significant diffuse diabetic macular oedema follow-up time was 3.48 +/- 3.25 months (mean +/- SD). The study group was compared with a control group of 16 patients with diffuse diabetic macular oedema who underwent grid laser coagulation of the macular region. RESULTS: In the study group, visual acuity increased significantly (p = 0.03) from 0.11 +/- 0.09 at baseline of the study to a maximum of 0.19 +/- 0.13 during the follow-up period. Six (85.7 %) of the seven eyes with a follow-up period of more than 4 weeks gained in visual acuity. Towards the end of the follow-up period, the triamcinolone acetonide crystals completely resolved and visual acuity decreased to 0.15 +/- 0.11, which was higher, but not significantly (p = 0.14) higher than the baseline value. Visual acuity was significantly (p < 0.05) higher in the study group than in the control group for the examinations obtained up to 12 weeks after the injection. CONCLUSIONS: Intravitreal injection of 25 mg crystalline triamcinolone acetonide may be beneficial for temporarily increasing visual acuity in patients with clinically significant diffuse diabetic macular oedema.     

Intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection as primary treatment for diabetic macular edema

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of intravitreal triamcinolone injection on the course of diabetic macular edema. METHODS: Forty-eight eyes of 48 diabetic patients were treated with 8 mg of intravitreal triamcinolone injection as the primary therapy for diabetic macular edema. The main outcome measures included best-corrected visual acuity, fundus fluorescein angio- graphy, macular edema map values of Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph II (HRT II), and intraocular pressures before and after intravitreal injection. RESULTS: The visual acuity increased in 41 of 48 eyes (85.4%) during a mean follow-up time of 7.5 months. The mean baseline best-corrected logMAR (logarithm of minimal angle of resolution) value for visual acuities of the patients before intravitreal triamcinolone injection was 1.17+/-0.20. After treatment, it was 0.85+/-0.29 at 1 month, 0.73+/-0.30 at 3 months, and 0.74+/-0.31 at 6 months, and the differences were significant when compared with baseline values (for each, p<0.001). The mean edema map values significantly decreased by 36% at the 6-month examinations when compared with preinjection values (p<0.001). Average intraocular pressure rose 24.3%, 29.1%, and 11.8% from baseline at the 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-up intervals. Intraocular pressure elevation exceeding 21 mmHg was observed in 8 of 48 eyes (16.6%), but was controlled with topical antiglaucomatous medications in all eyes. CONCLUSIONS: Intravitreal triamcinolone application provides significant improvement in visual acuity of diabetic patients and clinical course of macular edema, and may therefore be a promising approach in the primary treatment of diabetic macular edema.     

曲安奈德玻璃体腔注射治疗弥漫性糖尿病黄斑水肿的临床观察

目的:研究曲安奈德玻璃体腔注射联合黄斑部格栅样光凝治疗弥漫性糖尿病黄斑水肿效果。方法:对35例37眼弥漫性糖尿病黄斑水肿患者随机分为两组单纯玻璃体腔曲安奈德注射组及联合黄斑部格栅样光凝治疗组,其中光凝组在注药后1mo行黄斑部格栅样光凝,分别对比各组治疗前及治疗后1,3,6mo视力及黄斑厚度进行统计分析。结果:单纯曲安奈德注射组注药后1,3mo视力分别为0.28±0.19、0.22±0.14较注射前视力0.15±0.13提高,有统计学意义(P<0.05),治疗后6mo视力为0.17±0.10与治疗前视力无统计差异(P>0.05),黄斑厚度注药后1,3,6mo分别为231.82±61.02μm、255.12±92.66μm、349.06±116.19μm均较注药前469±136.60μm减轻(P<0.01),但治疗后6mo较3mo黄斑厚度明显增加有统计学意义(P<0.01),提示黄斑水肿复发;联合治疗组注药后1,3,6mo视力为0.27±0.17、0.25±0.15,0.23±0.13,与治疗前视力0.14±0.11对比均明显提高(P<0.01),黄斑厚度治疗后1,3,6mo分别为245.68±74.85μm、257.36±79.44μm、276.57±99.64μm较治疗前黄斑厚度473.33±123.22μm显著减轻(P<0.01),但6mo与3mo黄斑厚度对比无显著增加(P>0.05)。观察期间29%患眼出现眼压升高,经局部降眼压药物治疗后得到控制。结论:曲安奈德玻璃体腔注射联合黄斑部格栅样光凝治疗弥漫性糖尿病黄斑水肿,能减轻黄斑水肿,提高患者视力,但仍需进一步长期临床观察。     

Nine‐month results of intravitreal bevacizumab versus triamcinolone for the treatment of diffuse diabetic macular oedema: a retrospective analysis

Objective: To compare efficacy of intravitreal bevacizumab versus triamcinolone in the treatment of diffuse diabetic macular oedema (DME). Methods: This retrospective nonrandomized study includes 60 patients with diffuse DME treated with at least one intravitreal triamcinolone injection (ITA) or intravitreal bevacizumab injection (IBe). Regression analysis was performed for pretreatment, glycosylated haemoglobin level, visual acuity (VA) at baseline and central macular thickness (CMT) at baseline. Results: After 1‐, 3‐, 6‐ and 9‐month follow‐up, there was no significant change in either VA or CMT treatment in the ITA and IBe groups. There was no statistically significant difference between the two treatment groups. Changes in CMT and VA in the subgroups were not significant. Only predictive factor independent of HbA1c level and VA was CMT at baseline in both treatment groups. The thicker CMT at baseline, the higher was reduction in CMT. After 1 month, the IBe group had a significantly higher decrement than the ITA group. Conclusion: In our study collective, neither IBe nor ITA treatment was able to improve VA during follow‐up, significantly. CMT was reduced in both treatment groups, however not significantly. Our data demonstrates that reduction in CMT with either IBe or ITA treatment was significantly influenced by degree of CMT at baseline.     

Duration of the effect of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide as treatment for diffuse diabetic macular edema

PURPOSE: To evaluate the duration of the effect of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide on visual acuity in patients with diffuse diabetic macular edema. DESIGN: Clinical interventional case series. METHODS: Subjects were 31 patients (38 eyes) with diffuse diabetic macular edema who received an intravitreal injection of 20- to 25-mg triamcinolone acetonide. Mean follow-up time was 13.2 +/- 6.0 months (6.03-25.2 months). RESULTS: Visual acuity and intraocular pressure began to increase significantly (P =.003) within the first week, reaching a plateaulike maximum at 1 to 7 months postinjection, returning to baseline values 8 to 9 months postinjection. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of an intravitreal injection of approximately 20- to 25-mg triamcinolone acetonide in patients with diffuse diabetic macular edema lasts approximately 7 to 8 months. This information may be helpful in determining the optimal dosage of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide for the treatment of diffuse diabetic macular edema.     

Comparative therapy evaluation of intravitreal bevacizumab and triamcinolone acetonide on persistent diffuse diabetic macular edema

PURPOSE: To compare the effect of an intravitreal injection of bevacizumab, an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) antibody, with that of triamcinolone acetonide, a corticosteroid for reduction of diabetic macular edema (DME). DESIGN: Prospective, comparative interventional case series. METHODS: Twenty-eight eyes of 14 patients with bilateral DME participated in this study. In each patient, one eye received an intravitreal injection of 4 mg triamcinolone acetonide and the other eye received 1.25 mg bevacizumab. The clinical course of best-corrected visual acuity (VA) with a logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution chart and averaged foveal thickness using optical coherence tomography was monitored for up to 24 weeks after the injection. RESULTS: Before the injection, foveal thickness and VA were 522.3 +/- 91.3 microm and 0.64 +/- 0.28 microm in the triamcinolone-injected eye, and 527.6 +/- 78.8 microm and 0.61 +/- 0.18 microm in the bevacizumab-injected eye, respectively; there was no significant difference between the eyes. One week after the injection, both eyes showed significant regression of macular edema. The triamcinolone-injected eye (342.6 +/- 85.5 microm and 0.33 +/- 0.21 microm) showed significantly better results than the bevacizumab-injected eye (397.6 +/- 103.0 microm and 0.37 +/- 0.17 microm). However, both eyes showed the recurrence of macular edema with time, even at 24 weeks. Triamcinolone (410.4 +/- 82.4 microm and 0.47 +/- 0.25 microm) kept better results than bevacizumab (501.6 +/- 92.5 microm and 0.61 +/- 0.17 microm). CONCLUSIONS: With the generally used concentration, intravitreal injection of triamcinolone acetonide showed better results in reducing DME and in the improvement of VA than that of bevacizumab, suggesting that the pathogenesis of DME is not only attributable to VEGF-dependency, but is also attributable to other mechanisms suppressed by corticosteroid.     

Intravitreal triamcinolone injection for chronic diffuse diabetic macular oedema

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy and safety of intravitreal triamcinolone in chronic diffuse diabetic macular oedema. METHODS: This prospective, interventional consecutive case series study consisted of 59 eyes (36 patients) with chronic diffuse diabetic macular oedema, which received an intravitreal injection of 4 mg triamcinolone acetonide. The results were evaluated by clinical examination and fluorescein angiography. Potential complications such as a rise in intraocular pressure, cataract progression and endophthalmitis were recorded. RESULTS: All patients completed at least 6 months follow up. The mean visual acuity improved significantly from 0.17 +/- 3.4 to a maximum of 0.30 +/- 3.3 at the third postinjection month (P < 0.01). Mean improvements in visual acuity measured were 2.15 +/- 1.66, 2.42 +/- 2.66, 1.13 +/- 2.74, 0.96 +/- 2.01 and 0.08 +/- 2.34 lines at the 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months follow-up intervals, respectively. In all eyes in fluorescein angiography, macular oedema was resolved (63%) or decreased (37%) during the follow up. However, the macular oedema reached the pretreatment level in 29 (49%) of the eyes at 6 months and 15 of 21 eyes (71%) at 9 months after injection. Intraocular pressure exceeded 21 mmHg in 10 eyes, which were controlled by topical medication. Four eyes showed cataract progression. Endophthalmitis was not observed in any of the eyes. CONCLUSIONS: Intravitreal injection of 4 mg triamcinolone acetonide appears to be an effective and relatively safe therapeutic method for diffuse diabetic macular oedema. Further studies are warranted to assess the long-term efficacy, safety and the need for reinjection.     

玻璃体腔内注射曲安奈德治疗糖尿病性弥漫性黄斑水肿

目的:观察玻璃体腔内注射曲安奈德治疗糖尿病性弥漫性黄斑水肿的疗效。方法:经检眼镜、光相干断层扫描及荧光素眼底血管造影检查证实的糖尿病性弥漫性黄斑水肿患者25例(25眼),玻璃体腔内注射40g/L的曲安奈德0.1mL,随访6mo,对比观察治疗前后视力、眼压及黄斑区视网膜厚度变化。结果:治疗后1,3,6mo,平均视力分别为0.20±0.15,0.35±0.20,0.21±0.18,与治疗前的0.08±0.04相比,其差异具有统计学意义;黄斑区视网膜厚度分别为360.7±50.2,263.2±60.1,313.5±86.4μm,与治疗前的463.4±105.1μm相比,其差异具有统计学意义。结论:玻璃体腔内注射曲安奈德治疗糖尿病性弥漫性黄斑水肿短期内能有效改善黄斑水肿,提高视力,但其长期疗效和安全性需进一步研究。