Objectives To evaluate the duration and long-term efficacy of intravitreal injection of ranibizumab (IVR) combined with Ozurdex® (DEX) in the treatment of retinal vein occlusion with macular edema (RVO-ME).Methods This retrospective case study included 38 patients with non-ischemic RVO-ME who were initially treated by intravitreal injection of IVR combined with DEX. Patients with recurrence of macular edema continued with IVR+DEX therapy. Data were recorded for all patients at baseline and at 1 week, and 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, and 12 months after treatment. The primary outcome measures were the average reinjection interval and the number of injections. Results The mean interval for reinjection of RVO-ME was 134.2±9.1 days. The average number of injections was 4.2±1.1, and 65.8% of patients received 4 injections. There was no significant difference in mean reinjection interval and injection number between central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) and branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) patients. At the end of follow-up, the mean improvement of BCVA in CRVO and BRVO patients was 0.29±0.26 and 0.31±0.33, respectively, and 52.6% (20/38) patients experienced visual acuity improvement of > 3 lines. The average decrease in CFT was 406.0±272.3 μm and 408.2±379.9 μm, respectively, and there was no significant difference between the two types of RVO-ME in BCVA improvement and CFT reduction (p=0.82 and 0.98). Conclusion Intravitreal injection of ranibizumab combined with Ozurdex® led to better efficacy, fewer injections, lower medical burden, and more controllable side effects.

Purpose To compare the efficacy and injection frequency of intravitreal low-dose vs. intermediate-dose ganciclovir therapy in acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) patients exhibiting cytomegalovirus retinitis (CMVR). Methods A prospective, single-centre, double-blinded, randomized controlled interventional study was conducted. Fifty patients with a total of 67 included eyes were randomly divided into low-dose (0.4 mg ganciclovir per week) and intermediate-dose (1.0 mg ganciclovir per week) groups. The primary clinical outcomes were the changes in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline to the end of treatment and the 12-month follow-up visit as well as the number of intravitreal injections. Results In both groups, the median BCVA, expressed as the logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), improved significantly from baseline to the end of treatment (both p < 0.001), while vision loss from CMVR continued to occur at the 12-month visit. The mean number of injections was 5.8 in the low-dose group and 5.4 in the intermediate-dose group. No significant differences were detected between the two groups (p > 0.05). Regarding the location of CMVR, we found that Zone I lesions led to a worse visual outcome, more injections and a higher occurrence rate of complications than lesions in other zones (p < 0.05). Conclusions The efficacy and frequency of injections to treat CMVR in AIDS patients were not significantly different between low and intermediate doses. Zone I lesions were associated with a worse visual outcome, more injections and a higher occurrence rate of CMVR-related complications than lesions in other zones.

PurposeTo compare the efficacy and the injection number of intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) monotherapy vs. intravitreal ranibizumab plus dexamethasone (IVR + DEX) implants for macular edema (ME) secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO).MethodsThis prospective, control trial comprised 96 eyes of 96 patients with ME due to non-ischemic RVO divided into two groups. The IVR monotherapy group consisted of 61 patients (29 with CRVO and 32 with BRVO) treated with ranibizumab with three consecutive loading doses at a monthly + pro re nata (three + PRN) regimen. The IVR + DEX implant group consisted of 35 patients (19 with CRVO and 16 with BRVO) treated with intravitreal ranibizumab plus DEX implant. All eyes underwent best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA, log MAR), central foveal thickness (CFT), and intraocular pressure (IOP). In case of recurrence, each group received initial medication.ResultsAt the 12-month visit, the mean log MAR BCVA that was improved from baseline was 0.23 with the IVR group and 0.30 with the IVR + DEX group. CFT decreased on average by 420 ± 292 μm with the IVR group and 393 ± 259 μm with the IVR + DEX implant group. No significant differences were detected in BCVA improvement and CFT reduction between the two groups (p &gt; 0.05). The mean number of injections was 5.4 in the IVR group and 3.9 in the IVR + DEX implant group (p &lt; 0.001). The mean reinjection interval for patients with the IVR + DEX implant was 131.2 ± 8.9 days (range: 98–150). The incidence of high IOP and cataract progression were significantly higher in the IVR + DEX implant group than in the IVR group (both p &lt; 0.001).ConclusionIn RVO-ME, the IVR + DEX implant did not have synergistic efficacy, providing further improvement in BCVA and a reduction in CFT. However, the IVR + DEX implant still had an advantage in reducing the number of injections and prolonging the time between injections.

Purpose: To compare the efficacy and injection frequency of intravitreal low-dose vs. intermediate-dose ganciclovir therapy in acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) patients with cytomegalovirus retinitis (CMVR).Methods: A prospective, single-center, double-blinded, randomize controlled interventional study was conducted. Fifty patients with together 67 eyes were randomly assigned to low-dose (0.4mg ganciclovir per week) and intermediate-dose (1.0mg ganciclovir per week) groups. The primary clinical outcome were BCVA change from baseline to treatment endpoint and 12 months visit, and the number of intravitreal injections.Results: In boths group, the median LogMAR BCVA improved significantly from baseline to treatment endpoint (boths p<0.001), while vision loss from CMVR continue to occur at 12 months visit. The mean number of injections was 5.8 in low-dose group and 5.4 in intermeditate group. No significant differences were detected between the two groups (p>0.05). According to the location of CMVR, we found that Zone I lesions led to a worse visual outcome, more injections and a higher occurrence rate of complications (p<0.05). Conclusions: the efficacy and injection frequency of treating CMVR in AIDS patients was not significantly different from low-dose or intermediate-dose. Zone I lesions were associated with a worse visual outcome, more injections and a higher occurrence rate of CMVR-related complications.