Bevacizumab versus bevacizumab and macular grid photocoagulation for macular edema in eyes with non-ischemic branch retinal vein occlusion: results from a prospective randomized study

Callizo, Josep; Atili, A.; Striebe, Nina Antonia; Bemme, Sebastian; Feltgen, Nicolas; Hoerauf, Hans; Bertelmann, Thomas

doi:10.1007/s00417-018-04223-9

Cited by 11 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also, the number of injections was similar (4 vs. 6) between two groups (P = 0.0756). Some recent reports have also shown that this combination therapy can significantly improve BCVA and reduce CRT [12][13][14][15], but the number of injections has not decreased, which is similar to the results of our study [12,13]. In the past we thought ranibizumab can neutralize upregulated intravitreal VEGF levels which contribute to ME development due to a blood-barrier breakdown in BRVO [16], and laser can activate the pump function of retinal pigment epithelium and transport fluid out of the retinal structures to reduce CRT due to ME [17].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Our results showed that there was no difference in improvement of visual acuity, reduction of macular edema and injection times within 1 year regardless of whether ischemia or whether combined with laser therapy. In previous similar studies, Callizo focused on BRVO patients with non-ischemic macular edema [12], while Tadayoni divided BRVO patients into macular ischemic and non-ischemic groups [13]. These above are different from our grouping criteria, in which BRVO patients are grouped according to whether the retina is ischemic or not, and macular ischemia is not involved.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…BCVA of patients was assessed with ETDRS VA testing charts by a certified examiner at baseline and every follow-up visit. The standard testing distance was 4 m, changing to 1 meter in case a patient could not read 4 letters at 4 m at least [12].…”

Section: Best-corrected Vision Acuitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Combination of Ranibizumab with macular laser for macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion: one-year results from a randomized controlled double-blind trial

Song¹,

Yu²,

Zhang³

et al. 2020

BMC Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: It is not clear whether macular laser combined with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) can reduce the number of anti-VEGF injections in the treatment of macular edema (ME) secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO). Our study aimed to investigate the effects of intravitreal ranibizumab with or without macular laser for ME secondary to BRVO and its associated number of anti-VEGF injections. Methods: This is a prospective, randomized, double-blind, monocentric trial.80 patients were enrolled and 64 patients fulfilled the study requirements. All patients received a minimum of 3 initial monthly ranibizumab injections, pro re nata (PRN) dosing thereafter VA and CRT stabilization criteria-driven PRN treatment. Laser was given 7 days after third ranibizumab injection in ranibizumab with laser group. The follow-up time of this study was 1 year. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improvement, central retinal thickness (CRT) reduction and number of injections of patients were compared between two groups. T-test, non-parametric Wilcoxon test and chis-square tests were adopted for between-group comparisons. Results: Thirty patients received intravitreal ranibizumab 0.5 mg alone and 34 patients received intravitreal ranibizumab 0.5 mg with macular laser. At 52 week, BCVA increased significantly and CRT decreased significantly in both groups (P < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in BCVA improvement with baseline BCVA adjusted (p = 0.5226), and in the CRT reduction (P = 0.4552) between two groups after 52 weeks. There was also no significant difference in the number of injections between the two groups. (P = 0.0756). There was also no significant difference between ischemic and non-ischemic groups in BCVA improvement, CRT reduction and number of injections (P > 0.05).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Combination of Ranibizumab with macular laser for macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion: one-year results from a randomized controlled double-blind trial

Song¹,

Yu²,

Zhang³

et al. 2020

BMC Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Though not statistically significant, they even report a tendency to higher BCVA gain in monotherapy than combination therapy (Callizo et al. ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…; Callizo et al. ) and, for the sake of comparison, converted by us to mean ETDRS letters according to the formula introduced by Khoshnood et al. (Khoshnood et al.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is there still a role of macular laser treatment in branch retinal vein occlusion in the era of intravitreal injections?

Stenner

Frederiksen

Grauslund

2019

Acta Ophthalmologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We aimed to evaluate whether macular laser still has a role in the treatment of macular oedema (MO) caused by branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) and provide an overview of recent studies on commonly available treatment options. A literature search was last conducted in PubMed on 26 February 2019, limited to human randomized controlled trials published in English since 2008. Seventeen articles addressing 13 trials were included in this assessment. In trials evaluating intravitreal corticosteroid and macular laser, triamcinolone was non-inferior to laser in regard to visual acuity (VA) and central retinal thickness (CRT) outcomes. Combination treatment of dexamethasone and laser resulted in better VA and lower CRT after 6 months. In trials evaluating vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors versus macular laser treatment, or sham and rescue laser, better VA and CRT of VEGF inhibition treatment was consistently reported. Results of combination treatment versus VEGF inhibition monotherapy were inconsistent, with four of six studies reporting comparable outcomes and injection burden. Study comparison was affected by considerable differences in study design and inadequate reporting of laser protocol and rescue laser. Studies evaluating angiostatic treatment as monotherapy largely report the use of rescue laser, indicating that some patients would benefit from supplemental laser treatment even in the era of intravitreal therapy. Thus, we suggest further studies on optimal design of combination therapy prioritizing longer follow-up time to sufficiently evaluate the delayed effect of laser.

show abstract

Ischämie und Lasertherapie bei retinalen venösen Verschlüssen

Rehák

Storch²,

Hattenbach³

et al. 2022

Ophthalmologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bevacizumab versus bevacizumab and macular grid photocoagulation for macular edema in eyes with non-ischemic branch retinal vein occlusion: results from a prospective randomized study

Cited by 11 publications

References 35 publications

Combination of Ranibizumab with macular laser for macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion: one-year results from a randomized controlled double-blind trial

Combination of Ranibizumab with macular laser for macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion: one-year results from a randomized controlled double-blind trial

Is there still a role of macular laser treatment in branch retinal vein occlusion in the era of intravitreal injections?

Ischämie und Lasertherapie bei retinalen venösen Verschlüssen

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About