ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) combined with intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) against PRP monotherapy for diabetic retinopathy (DR).MethodsWe searched Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, and Science Direct Register of Controlled Trials from April 2011 to January 2021 to identify the randomized trials that compared the efficacy and safety between PRP combined with intravitreal anti-VEGF and PRP monotherapy for DR. We searched in the following databases between April 2011 and January 2021: Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, and Science Direct without any restriction of countries or article type. The outcome measures were the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), neovascularization on the disc (NVD), neovascularization elsewhere (NVE), central macula thickness (CMT), and total retinal volume over time (FAS), and we also observed the adverse events (AEs) between the two groups.ResultsA total of 351 studies were identified, of which 11 studies were included in this meta-analysis (N = 1,182 eyes). Compared with PRP monotherapy, PRP plus anti-VEGF combination treatment produced a mean reduction in BCVA in units of logMAR of -0.23 [95% CI -0.32, -0.15] or a mean improvement in BCVA in units of letters of 4.99 [95% CI 3.79, 6.19], and also yielded a mean reduction in NVD of -28.41 [95% CI -30.30, -26.52], in NVE of -1.33 [95% CI -1.52, -1.14], in CMT of -1.33 [95% CI -1.52, -1.14], or in total FAS. No significant difference was observed on the risk of AEs as vitreous hemorrhage, elevation in intraocular pressure, and cataract between the two different treatments.ConclusionPRP with anti-VEGF combination treatment can achieve the ideal efficacy on DR by improving BCVA and NV regression, with no potential increased incidence of AEs, which proves that the combination therapy is an efficient therapeutic strategy that could improve the management of patients with DR.

Background Retinal vein occlusion (RVO) is the main cause of retinal vascular blindness. Laser photocoagulation therapy is the regarded as the standard treatment for branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) in the guidelines, but it is not effective for macular edema (ME) secondary to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO). As anti-VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor) or steroids monotherapy has been used to treat RVO, but each has its advantages and disadvantages. Our purpose was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intraocular injection of anti-VEGF combined with steroids versus anti-VEGF or steroids monotherapy for ME secondary to RVO. Methods We systematically searched trials on Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) for RCTs (random clinical trials) or non-RCTs, comparing anti-VEGF or steroids monotherapy to their combination. The primary outcomes were changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT) and intraocular pressure (IOP). The pooled data was analyzed by random effects model. Findings A total of 10 studies selected from 366 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Our results favored anti-VEGF with steroids combination therapy in comparison with anti-VEGF {pooled SMD (standardized mean difference), 95% CI, -0.16 [-0.28, -0.04], P = 0.01} or steroids (pooled SMD, 95% CI, -0.56 [-0.73, -0.40], P < 0.00001) alone on changes of BCVA. Compared with anti-VEGF monotherapy group, the combination therapy also had a better effect {pooled MD (mean difference), 95% CI, -9.62 [-17.31, -1.93], P = 0.01)} at improvements on CMT. On the changes of IOP, assessment favored that combination therapy was associated with a better relief of IOP compared to steroids monotherapy group (pooled MD, 95% CI, -5.93 [-7.87, -3.99],P < 0.00001). What’s more, the incidence of ocular hypertension was lower in the combined treatment group compared with control group treated with steroids alone (Odds Ratio, 95% CI, 0.21 [0.06, 0.77], P = 0.02). Results also showed that the combination group can prolong the average time to first anti-VEGF reinjection (MD, 95% CI, 1.74 [0.57, 2.90], P = 0.003) compared to control group treated with anti-VEGF alone. Conclusion Anti-VEGF with steroids combination treatment can enable a better achievement of improving BCVA, CMT, reducing the risk of increased IOP and improving patient prognosis compared to anti-VEGF or steroids therapy alone, lengthening the average time to anti-VEGF reinjection with reducing the injections during follow-up.