Different Dosages of Intravitreal Triamcinolone Acetonide Injections for Macular Edema Secondary to Central Retinal Vein Occlusion

Purpose:.To study the effect of intravitreal injections of triamcinolone acetonide (TA) for the treatment of macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion.(CRVO).in a sample of Chinese patients from Shaanxi province. Methods:.The 50 eyes from 50 patients were separated into three TA treatment groups:.17 patients were given 4 mg/0.1 ml,.19 patients were given 8 mg/0.2 ml,.and 14 patients were given 16 mg/0.4 ml. Patients were followed up for 12 months. Foveal thickness, intraocular pressure (IOP), and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were measured. Results:.Macular edema responded well both anatomically and functionally to the TA injections. After the initial intravitreal injection,.macular edema recurred at 2-4 months in the low-dose group.(4 mg),.at 3-5 months in the medium-dose group (8 mg), and at 6-9 months in the high-dose group (16 mg)..No significant difference in BCVA or in foveal thickness were observed between the first intravitreal injection and the re-injection. There was no increase in IOP after re-injection of 16 mg TA,.if the patient did not have an elevated IOP after the initial intravitreal injection of 4/8 mg TA. Conclusion: A low dosage of TA (4 mg) administered via intravitreal injection might be useful as an initial treatment for macular edema secondary to CRVO..A higher dosage of TA (16mg) can be used if there is no IOP elevation with the initial TA injection.     

Effects of Intravitreal Triamcinolone Injection on Macular Edema and Visual Prognosis in Central Retinal Vein Occlusion

Aim To determine the effect of intravitreal triamcinolone injection on macular edema and the visual prognosis in cases with CRVO. Methods Eyes with CRVO were classified as ischemic or nonischemic according to extend of retinal capillary nonperfusion. The patients received intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection (4 mg/0.1 ml). A complete ophthalmologic evaluation together with flourescein angiography (FA) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) were performed for each patient at presentation and at follow-up visits. The functional and anatomical results of both groups were assessed separately. Results A total of 22 eyes (11 ischemic, 11 nonischemic) were included in the study. Mean duration of symptoms before steroid injection was 4.9±5.5 months. Mean follow-up time was 11.5±2.4. All the eyes completed at least 9 months of examination. At least 3 lines of visual acuity increase using snellen visual acuity chart was observed in 81.8% of the eyes in nonischemic group, while only in 18.2% of the eyes in the ischemic group. In ischemic group, the mean foveal thickness was 766±320.7 μm at presentation, which significantly decreased to 441.7±166.9 μm at 9th month. In nonischemic group, the mean foveal thickness was 667±223 μm at presentation, which significantly decreased to 320±175.5 at 9th month. Significant IOP elevation was observed in 8 (36.4%) of the eyes, 75% of which could be controlled with medical treatment. Conclusion Intravitreal triamcinolone injection may be a promising and effective method for the treatment of macular edema associated with CRVO. Although anatomical results are similar in both groups, functional results are better in non-ischemic CRVO cases.     

Dose Dependent Effects of Intravitreal Triamcinolone Acetonide on Diffuse Diabetic Macular Edema

Purpose

To evaluate the effect of different doses of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide on diffuse diabetic macular edema.

Methods

In a retrospective study, 44 eyes with diffuse diabetic macular edema were treated with an intravitreal injection of 4 mg (n=12 eyes), 8 mg (n=17) or 25 mg (n=15) of triamcinolone acetonide (TA). Optical coherence tomography, best-corrected logMAR visual acuity and Goldmann tonometry were performed at baseline, 1 week, and 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after treatment. Mean follow-up was 9.8 months (standard deviation=2.3) with a range of 5-12 months.

Results

The duration of intravitreal TA effects on macular thickness and visual acuity increased with increasing dosage. An observed increase in intraocular pressure induced by TA was not significantly associated with dosage.

Conclusions

In patients with diffuse diabetic macular edema who receive intravitreal TA, effects may last longer after a dosage of 25 mg, than after lower doses of 8 mg or 4 mg.     

Sterile Endophthalmitis Following Intravitreal Injection of Triamcinolone Acetonide

Purpose: To investigate clinical findings and ocular characteristics of sterile endophthalmitis following intravitreal injection (IVI) of triamcinolone for the treatment of macular edema. Methods: IVI is an institutional practice at our hospital. From March 2002 to January 2003, a total of 21 IVIs of triamcinolone acetonide were performed on 19 patients with macular edema secondary to various retinal disorders. Cases diagnosed as sterile endophthalmitis after IVI of triamcinolone were selected for the study. Fisher's discriminant linear analysis was used to determine whether a significant correlation existed between specific ocular features and the occurrence of post-injection sterile endophthalmitis. Results: Five of 21 eyes (23.8%) had sterile endophthalmitis with hypopyon formation after the injection. Of the five sterile endophthalmitis patients, three were pseudophakic with impaired posterior capsule and four had a diagnosis of Irvine-Gass syndrome. The rate of sterile endophthalmitis was significantly higher in pseudophakic patients with impaired posterior capsule (p = 0.0075) and in patients with Irvine-Gass syndrome (p = 0.0008). The best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in these patients remained unchanged or even improved when the inflammation subsided. Conclusion: Pseudophakia with impaired posterior capsule and the diagnosis of cystoid macular edema due to Irvine-Gass syndrome are two risk factors of sterile endophthalmitis following IVI triamcinolone. No loss of BCVA was noted in the patients with post-injection sterile endophthalmitis.     

Intravitreal Triamcinolone Injection for Uveitic Macular Edema: A Randomized Clinical Study

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the additive effect of intravitrial triamcinolone (TA) injection in uveitic macular edema compared to systemic anti-inflammatory treatment only.

Methods: Patients were randomized into the intravitreal TA injection group and the sham group. All patients received systemic anti-inflammatory treatment with follow-up monthly to 6 months, with additional treatment as needed.

Results: Fifty eyes of 50 patients were enrolled. Central foveal thickness decreased significantly from month 1 in the TA group, and from month 3 in the sham group. Parafoveal area thickness significantly decreased in both groups from month 1, with greater decrease in the TA group at months 2 and 3. Leakage area on fluorescein angiography was significantly smaller in the TA group at months 1 to 3. Intraocular pressure increased in the TA group at months 1 and 2.

Conclusions: Intravitreal TA injection showed earlier reduction of leakage and retinal edema compared to systemic anti-inflammatory treatment alone.     

Comparison of Photocoagulation With Combined Intravitreal Triamcinolone for Diabetic Macular Edema

Purpose

To compare the efficacy between macular laser grid (MLG) photocoagulation and MLG plus intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA; MLG+IVTA) therapy in diabetic macular edema (DME) patients.

Methods

A prospective, randomized, clinical trial was conducted of DME patients. A total of 60 eyes (54 patients) affected by DME were observed for a minimum of 6 months. Thirty eyes of 28 patients who received MLG treatment and 30 eyes of 26 patients who received the combined MLG+IVTA treatment were included in the study. Main outcome measures were BCVA and central macular thickness (CMT) as measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT) at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment. Additionally, the authors examined retrospectively 20 eyes of 20 patients who were treated with only IVTA and compared with the 2 groups (MLG group and MLG+IVTA group).

Results

Baseline BCVA was 0.53±0.32 and CMT was 513.9±55.1 µm in the MLG group. At 1 and 3 months after treatment, the MLG group showed no significant improvement of BCVA and CMT, although there was significant improvement after 6 months. In the MLG+IVTA group, the baseline BCVA was 0.59±0.29 and CMT was 498.2±19.8 µm. After treatment, significant improvement of BCVA and CMT was observed at all follow-up time periods. When comparing the MLG group with the MLG+IVTA group, the latter had better results after 1 and 3 months, although at 6 months, there was no significant difference of BCVA and CMT between the 2 groups. Additionally, the IVTA group showed more improvement than the MLG group at 1 and 3 months but showed no significant difference at 6 months. In addition, the IVTA group showed no significant difference with the MLG+IVTA group at all follow-up time periods.

Conclusions

For DME patients, the combined MLG+IVTA treatment had a better therapeutic effect than the MLG treatment for improving BCVA and CMT at the early follow-up time periods. IVTA treatment alone could be an additional alternative therapeutic option to combined therapy.     

Comparison Between Intravitreal Bevacizumab and Triamcinolone for Macular Edema Secondary to Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion

Purpose

To compare the effects of intravitreal bevacizumab to those of triamcinolone acetonide injection for the treatment of macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion.

Methods

This retrospective study included 50 eyes of 50 patients who received a single injection of intravitreal bevacizumab (1.25 mg/0.05 mL, 22 eyes) or triamcinolone acetonide (4 mg/0.1 mL, 28 eyes) as the only treatment for macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion; all patients had a post-injection follow-up duration of >24 weeks. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), and central macular thickness (CMT) by optical coherence tomography were measured for up to 24 weeks after injection.

Results

BCVA was improved at 1, 4, 8,12 weeks post-injection in the bevacizumab group, and at 1, 4, 8 weeks post-injection in the triamcinolone group. No significant difference was found between the two groups except at 12 weeks. CMT decreased significantly within each group, and no significant difference between groups was found. In the bevacizumab group, no elevated IOP was observed, whereas IOP was significantly increased at 4, 8, and 12 weeks after triamcinolone injection; IOP was therefore significantly different between the two groups.

Conclusions

Intravitreal bevacizumab is a comparatively simple treatment method that can effectively improve BCVA and reduce CMT without ocular and systemic complications. Consequently, intravitreal bevacizumab injections may be useful as both an alternative and primary treatment for macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion.     

Safety and Efficacy of Intravitreal Triamcinolone Acetonide for Uveitic Macular Edema

Background: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (TA) for treating macular edema secondary to non-infectious uveitis. Methods: Retrospective review of sixteen patients (20 eyes) with chronic cystoid macular edema (CME) as a consequence of controlled intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, or panuveitis who received at least one intravitreal injection of TA. Main outcome measures were visual acuity (VA), intraocular pressure (IOP), formation or progression of an existing cataract, and CME resolution during the follow-up period. Results: At last follow-up, VA showed improvement (compared to baseline) in 11 eyes (55%), deterioration in three eyes (15%), remained completely unchanged in one eye (5%), and showed improvement initially but returned to baseline levels in five eyes (25%). At last follow-up, CME had relapsed or was still present in 10 of the eyes (50%). The remaining eyes showed complete resolution of the CME, without evidence of recurrence during the follow-up time. Mean VA at last follow-up showed statistically significant improvement (p = 0.02) in nonvitrectomized eyes (mean baseline VA: 1.14 ± 0.58; mean final VA: 0.96 ± 0.66) compared to the almost unaltered mean visual acuity for vitrectomized eyes (mean baseline VA: 0.76 ± 0.41; mean final VA: 0.71 ± 0.48)(p = 0.40, paired samples t-test). Elevation of IOP was transient in all cases and responded well to topical medications, except for one patient who required placement of an Ahmed valve. Preexisting cataract progressed in three of the 15 phakic eyes (20%). One patient developed a retinal detachment and required additional surgery to reattach it. Patients were followed for a mean of 34 weeks (median: 32 weeks; range: 19–56 weeks). Conclusions: Intravitreal TA may play a role in the treatment of uveitis-related CME. Further controlled studies are necessary to test this hypothesis.     

The Pros and Cons of Intravitreal Triamcinolone Injections for Uveitis and Inflammatory Cystoid Macular Edema

Intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) injections are gaining in popularity and are regularly administered nowadays for various ocular diseases. This paper presents a literature review on the use, efficacy, and complications of IVTA application in non-infectious uveitis and inflammatory cystoid macular edema (CME). In addition, we describe the experiences of our own institute. IVTA applications brought about a quick improvement in vision in the majority of cases. Drawbacks included the temporary duration of the effect with the need for repeated injections which re-exposed patients to the risk of complications. The risk of bacterial endophthalmitis was 0.5% and was further influenced by the specific IVTA preparation. Based on the literature review, we chose ready-for-use IVTA injections prepared by our pharmacy department, in which 90% of the toxic additives were removed and the dispensed dose of triamcinolone acetonide was validated to diminish the risk of endophthalmitis. Elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) was seen in 30–43% of the eyes and cataract developed in 29% of the eyes of patients, who were usually of advanced age. In conclusion, the rapid effect of IVTA might be of value in severe presentations of non-infectious uveitis and CME and might shorten the time interval needed for the improvement.     

Short-term Results of a Single Intravitreal Bevacizumab (Avastin) Injection versus a Single Intravitreal Triamcinolone Acetonide (Kenacort) Injection for the Management of Refractory Noninfectious Uveitic Cystoid Macular Edema

Purpose: To report the short-term results of a single intravitreal injection of bevacizumab (IVB) versus a single intravitreal injection of triamcinolone acetonide (IVT) to treat refractory noninfectious uveitic cystoid macular edema (CME).

Methods: Twenty-eight consecutive patients (36 eyes) were retrospectively included. Patients received either 2.5?mg of IVB (16 eyes) or 4?mg of IVT (20 eyes).

Results: In the IVT group, baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was logMAR 1.1?±?0.2, and improved to 0.7?±?0.3 (p?<?.001) at 6 months. In the IVB group, baseline BCVA was logMAR of 1.2?±?0.4 and improved to 0.8?±?0.4 at 6 months (p?=?.031). At 6 months, central macular thickness (CMT) in the IVT group improved from 454.8?±?238.9?μm to 296?±?134.4?μm (p?<?.0001).

Conclusion: A single IVT injection improves BCVA and reduces CMT more effectively than IVB in refractory noninfectious uveitic CME at 6 months.     

单次玻璃体腔注射雷珠单抗联合激光治疗视网膜分支静脉阻塞继发黄斑水肿

目的：观察单次玻璃体腔注射雷珠单抗联合激光光凝治疗视网膜分支静脉阻塞继发黄斑水肿的临床疗效。方法：回顾性系列病例研究。选择2014 年6月至2016 年12 月在台州市眼科医院经荧光素眼底血管造影确诊的视网膜分支静脉阻塞继发黄斑水肿的患者52例（52眼）,根据是否联合雷珠单抗治疗分为单纯激光组和联合治疗组,联合治疗组又根据接受雷珠单抗及激光治疗的先后顺序分为先激光组和后激光组。分别测量并记录患者治疗前,治疗后1、6 个月最佳矫正视力（BCVA）及黄斑中心凹厚度（CMT）。采用重复测量方差分析、单因素方差分析和配对t检验对数据进行统计学分析。结果：治疗前,治疗后1、6个月3组间BCVA总体差异有统计学意义（F=18.28,P=0.011）。治疗后1、6个月同一时间点3 组间BCVA比较,单纯激光组分别低于先激光组和后激光组（P < 0.01）。3 组治疗后6 个月BCVA较治疗前均有所提高,差异均有统计学意义（t=8.49、14.57、20.12,P < 0.01）。治疗前,治疗后1、6 个月3 组间CMT值总体差异有统计学意义（F=5.72,P=0.025）。治疗后1、6 个月同一时间点3 组间CMT值比较,单纯激光组分别大于先激光组和后激光组（P < 0.01）。3 组治疗后1、6 个月较治疗前CMT值均有所下降,差异均有统计学意义（P < 0.01）。结论：单次玻璃体腔注射雷珠单抗联合视网膜激光光凝治疗可有效减轻视网膜分支静脉阻塞继发黄斑水肿,提高患者的视力,其作用较单纯激光光凝治疗更加明显。     

Trans-Tenon's Retrobulbar Injection of Triamcinolone Acetonide for Diffuse Diabetic Macular Edema

Purpose To determine whether a trans-Tenon's retrobulbar injection of triamcinolone acetonide (TA) is a safe and effective treatment for diffuse diabetic macular edema. Methods Thirty-nine eyes of 30 diabetic patients with persistent macular edema were treated with 20 mg of TA injection. Central macular thickness (CMT) determined by optical coherence tomography (OCT) and visual acuity were evaluated before the injection and at 1, 2, 3, and 6 months, and up to 1 year in some eyes, after the injection. Results The CMT decreased significantly from 478 ± 129 μm (mean ± SD) before injection to 316 ± 102 μm at 1 month, 307 ± 104 μm at 2 months, and 275 ± 89 μm at 3 months after a single injection of TA. A 20% reduction of CMT from the initial value was maintained by a single injection of TA in 27 of 39 eyes (69.2%) at 3 months, in 14 of 22 eyes (63.6%) at 6 months, and in 5 of 7 eyes at 12 months. A recurrence of macular edema was observed in 10% of the eyes at 3 months, and in 22.7% at 6 months. The 17 eyes in which vitrectomy had been carried out had a more significant improvement in CMT than the eyes without vitrectomy. Conclusion A 20-mg trans-Tenon's retrobulbar TA injection is a safe and effective treatment for diabetic macular edema. Jpn J Ophthalmol 2005;49:509–515 ? Japanese Ophthalmological Society 2005     

Recurrence of Diabetic Macular Edema After Intravitreous Injection of Triamcinolone Following Vitrectomy

Purpose To evaluate the effects of intravitreous triamcinolone acetonide (TA) after pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for diabetic macular edema (DME). Methods We studied a prospective interventional case series. TA was injected intravitreously after PPV in 28 eyes (PPV+TA group). Eyes with DME that met the same criteria and had been treated with PPV alone (29 eyes) were used as controls. The best-corrected visual acuity (VA) and foveal thickness determined by optical coherence tomography were followed up for over 12 months in both groups. Chronological changes of VA and foveal thickness between the groups were evaluated. Results In the PPV+TA group, VA had improved at 1 month, but worsened after 3 months. Improvement of foveal thickness was found until 3 months, but not after 6 months. In controls, both VA and foveal thickness continued to improve. The VA of the PPV+TA group was significantly better than that of the controls at 1 and 3 months (P = 0.007 and 0.015, respectively). The foveal thickness of the PPV+TA group was significantly less than that of controls at 1 month (P = 0.0004). These differences became insignificant thereafter, and foveal thickness became significantly worse in the PPV+TA group than in the controls at 12 months (P = 0.0002). Conclusion Although adjunctive use of TA after PPV for DME improved VA and foveal thickness, the effect was transient and foveal thickness increased significantly compared with the PPV alone group at 12 months postoperatively. Jpn J Ophthalmol 2007;51:278–284 @ Japanese Ophthalmological Society 2007     

Comparison of Injection of Intravitreal Drugs with Standard Care in Macular Edema Secondary to Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion

Purpose

To compare the long-term efficacy and safety of intravitreal triamcinolon with or without rescue laser therapy (intravitreal triamcinolone injection [IVTA] group), bevacizumab with or without rescue laser treatment (intravitreal bevacizumab injection [IVB] group), or a combination of both with or without rescue laser therapy (IVTA + IVB group), with standard care for patients with macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO).

Methods

We reviewed the medical records of 151 patients treated with intravitreal injection with or without rescue laser for treatment of macular edema caused by BRVO, and who were followed up at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. During the observation period, rescue grid laser or repeated intravitreal injection with initial drug was performed if recurrence of macular edema was confirmed. Visual acuity, change in visual acuity, and intraocular pressure were compared in each phase.

Results

Totals of 16%, 5.6%, and 0% of participants in the three groups showed significant visual loss of more than three lines of the Snellen chart at last follow-up. The IVTA group was the least effective treatment modality, with statistical significance. The development rates of elevated intraocular pressure were similar among the groups.

Conclusions

Although IVTA yielded effects similar to those of standard grid photocoagulation based on the Standard Care vs Corticosteroid for Retinal Vein Occlusion study, IVB or IVTA + IVB with or without rescue laser treatment resulted in improvement in visual acuity at 24 months after the start of treatment and was associated with few serious adverse side effects. Thus, these approaches could be useful for treating macular edema arising secondary to BRVO.     

玻璃体内注射曲安奈德治疗视网膜中央静脉阻塞引起的黄斑水肿

目的：探讨玻璃体内注射丙酮化曲安奈德用于治疗视网膜中央静脉阻塞（CRVO）引起黄斑水肿的安全性和有效性。方法：在Wisconsin大学和Bascom Palmer眼科研究所．对13例（13只眼）连续的CRVO引起黄斑水肿的患者应用玻璃体内注射丙酮化曲安奈德（4mg）治疗．回顾研究其病历记录。每次玻璃体内注射时应用27G或30G针头通过睫状体平坦部注射。主要结果测量：Snellen视力的变化、黄斑水肿的临床表现、应用光学相干断层扫描仪（OCT）测量中心凹的增厚以及并发症的出现频率。结果：13例患者的平均年龄为67岁（四分位数间距为57—77岁）．注射前症状的平均持续时间为8个月（四分位数间距为4—9个月）。患眼在初诊时的平均视力为20／500．在6个月随诊检查时的平均视力为20／1踟。所有13例患者都完成了6个月的随诊检查。非缺血型CRVO患眼（n=5）的视力有显著的提高．而缺血型CRVO患眼（n=8）没有显著的视力提高。患者没有出现视力下降。初诊时OCT测量的平均中心凹厚度为590μm（视网膜增厚=416μm）。12例患者在1个月随诊检查时OCT测量的平均中心凹厚度为212pm（视网膜增厚=38μm）。13例患者在3个月随诊检查时OCT测量的平均中心凹厚度为193μm（视网膜增厚=19μm）。在3和6个月随诊检查之间．4例患者的黄斑水肿复发．其中3例患者再次接受了曲安奈德的注射。这3例患者中的2例经过再次治疗视力提高。在6个月随诊检查时．13例患者OCT测量的平均中心凹厚度为281μm（视网膜增厚=107μm）。没有发生视网膜脱离或眼内炎等并发症。1例患者出现了眼压的升高．应用2种房水生成抑制剂治疗得以控制。结论：在部分CRVO引起黄斑水肿的患者中．玻璃体内注射曲安奈德可能是一种有效的治疗方法。与缺血型CRVO患者相比．非缺血型CRVO患者可以获得更令人满意的效果。部分患者可能需要重复治疗。在本组患者中未发现严重的并发症。     

Comparison of Subtenon Triamcinolone Acetonide Injection with Topical Nepafenac for the Treatment of Pseudophakic Cystoid Macular Edema

Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of subtenon triamcinolone acetonide (TA) injection with topical nepafenac 0.1% for the treatment of pseudophakic cystoid macular edema (CME).

Methods: In this prospective study, the TA group comprised 24 eyes and the nepafenac group 24 eyes. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central retinal thickness (CRT), intraocular pressure measurements, and slit-lamp fundoscopy were performed in all subjects at baseline, 1, 2, 3, and 6 months.

Results: Changes in BCVA and CRT over four follow-up visits were statistically significant (p<0.001). The mean CRT decreased from 513.3 to 318.9 μm in the TA group and from 483.7 to 278.0 μm in the nepafenac group. This reduction was statistically significant (p<0.001 for both groups).

Conclusions: Our visual and OCT results suggest that both treatment modalities are effective with few side-effects. However, nepafenac is more efficacious than subtenon TA in terms of visual gain and its correlation with the reduction in CRT.     

小剂量曲安奈德玻璃体腔内注射治疗黄斑水肿

目的评价小剂量曲安奈德玻璃体腔内注射治疗黄斑水肿的效果和安全性。方法31例(31眼)黄斑水肿患者,其中糖尿病性黄斑水肿19例、视网膜中央静脉阻塞性黄斑水肿8例、白内障术后黄斑水肿4例,所有患者均行6mg曲安奈德玻璃体腔内注射。在注射后1周、1个月、2个月、3个月对患者视力、眼压进行检查并行黄斑部光相干断层扫描检查黄斑区视网膜厚度和黄斑区视网膜总容积。结果所有患者的视力在注射后均有一定升高,经LogMAR转换后注射前和注射后3个月视力分别为0.620±0.334和0·455±0·313(P<0.05);黄斑区视网膜厚度和容积下降,注射后3个月分别为(312±146)μm和(2.61±0.27)mm3,与注射前相比[(484±216)μm和(3.76±0.56)mm3]差异有显著性意义(P<0.05)。随访1周、1个月、2个月时的平均眼压[(18.1±6.4)mmHg、(18.9±6.3)mmHg、(17.6±5.8)mmHg,1kPa=7.5mmHg]较注射前平均水平[(14.2±4.6)mmHg]显著升高(P<0.05)。随访期内1例患者因白内障进展而需手术治疗。结论至少3个月随访期内,小剂量曲安奈德玻璃体腔内注射治疗黄斑水肿安全有效,没有严重并发症。     

康柏西普联合曲安奈德球内注射治疗糖尿病黄斑水肿

目的：探讨康柏西普联合曲安奈德球内注射治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿的疗效。

方法：回顾性队列研究。合并黄斑水肿的糖尿病患者40例43眼,治疗前记录BCVA、IOP和OCT检查。根据治疗方式分为两组,A组患者给予玻璃体腔注射康柏西普联合曲安奈德治疗,B组给予玻璃体腔注射康柏西普治疗。分别于治疗后1d,1、4、8、12、24wk记录BCVA、IOP和CMT及并发症等情况。

结果：A组治疗后不同时间点的视力与治疗前(0.83±0.03)相比均有差异(P<0.05),治疗8wk时达到最佳视力(0.23±0.04); 治疗后CMT与治疗前(612.4±47.6μm)有差异(P<0.05); 24wk内平均注射次数2.7次。B组治疗后不同时间点视力与治疗前(0.79±0.09)有差异(P<0.05),治疗4wk时达到最佳视力(0.25±0.06)。治疗后CMT与治疗前(597.8±62.4μm)有差异(P<0.05),24wk内平均注射次数3.6次。两组患者第一针与第二针治疗间隔时间有差异(P<0.05)。两组患者治疗前后眼压无差异(P>0.05)。

结论：康柏西普联合曲安奈德球内注射治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿安全、有效、见效快,但疗效更持久,且可降低打针频率。     

曲安奈德玻璃体内注射联合激光光凝治疗黄斑水肿的临床研究

目的观察激光光凝联合曲安奈德玻璃体内注射治疗黄斑水肿的疗效。方法将40例(40眼)黄斑水肿患者分为单纯光凝组和联合注药组,每组20眼,分别行黄斑格栅样光凝和黄斑格栅样光凝联合玻璃体内注射40g·L-1曲安奈德0.1mL治疗,观察治疗前及治疗后1个月、3个月、6个月2组患者视力和黄斑中心凹厚度的变化,并观察术后并发症情况。结果单纯光凝组和联合注药组术前平均视力分别为0.11±0.09和0.12±0.10,黄斑中心厚度分别为(535±147)μm和(527±145)μm,2组间差异均无统计学意义(均为P>0.05)。治疗后1个月、3个月、6个月,单纯光凝组和联合注药组平均视力分别为0·19±0.09和0.42±0.09、0.24±0.09和0.38±0.10、0.24±0.09和0.42±0.09;黄斑厚度分别为(405±150)μm和(248±164)μm、(354±124)μm和(279±133)μm、(325±124)μm和(285±118)μm,2组间比较差异均有统计学意义(均为P<0·05)。光凝组术后1例患者眼压升高,联合注药组6例眼压升高,经药物治疗后均恢复正常;联合注药组治疗后2例患者黄斑水肿复发,经再次注药后1例治愈;随访期内均未见严重并发症发生。结论曲安奈德玻璃体内注射联合激光光凝治疗黄斑水肿可较快提高视力、减轻黄斑水肿、减少水肿复发。     

The Variable Efficacy of Intravitreal Bevacizumab and Triamcinolone Acetonide for Cystoid Macular Edema Due to Radiation Retinopathy

Abstract

Background: Both intravitreal bevacizumab and triamcinolone have been shown to be effective in treating macular edema secondary to VEGF-mediated disease. The purpose of this study is to describe the variable effects of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) and triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) in the treatment of macular edema secondary to radiation retinopathy. Methods: Retrospective, nonrandomized, interventional case series. Charts of five patients with macular edema due to radiation retinopathy who received IVB with subsequent IVTA were reviewed. Clinical examination, Snellen visual acuity (VA), and central macular thickness (CMT) on optical coherence tomography (OCT) were examined. Main outcome measures included VA and CMT. Results: Of the five patients reviewed, patient 1 demonstrated complete resolution of macular edema both clinically and by OCT with IVB after the first two injections with a decrease in CMT to 243 and 284?µm from a baseline CMT of 340?µm. However, response diminished following successive injections and the patient was switched to IVTA with a complete response. Mean CMT was 249?µm following four injections of IVTA and vision improved 3 lines. Patients 2 and 3 demonstrated a partial response to IVB with a mean CMT of 362 and 451?µm from 436 and 596?µm, respectively. They similarly had a partial response to IVTA with a mean CMT of 363 and 433?µm from 460 and 429?µm. There was no improvement in vision. Patient 2 was then switched to a combination of IVB and IVTA with complete resolution of macular edema with a CMT of 299 and 289?µm following two treatments. Patients 4 and 5 failed to respond to IVB with a mean increase in CMT of 64.5 and 6?µm. Both responded well to IVTA with complete resolution of macular edema. Mean decrease in CMT was 146 and 183?µm with a mean CMT of 254 and 281?µm. Final vision was stable in patient 4 and improved 3 lines from 20/100 to 20/50 in patient 5. Conclusion: IVB and IVTA have variable effects on the reduction of macular edema due to radiation retinopathy. IVB appears to have an initial effect in reducing macular edema in some patients but after multiple injections there can be resistance to its effects. IVTA was effective in three of five patients with complete resolution of macular edema. The combination of IVB and IVTA completely resolved macular edema in one patient resistant to IVB or IVTA alone. The reason for this may be due to their different therapeutic mechanisms of action and consideration should therefore be given to their use in combination.