Intravitreal Bevacizumab (Avastin) for Central and Hemicentral Retinal Vein Occlusions

Costa, Rogério A.; Jorge, Rodrigo; Calucci, Daniela; Melo, Luiz Alberto S.; Cardillo, J.A.; Scott, Ingrid U.

doi:10.1097/iae.0b013e31802eff83

Cited by 168 publications

(100 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In our study, the dose of 1.25 mg of bevacizumab was similar to several previous studies (8,1013,21,22) using the same treatment modality ex cept for that used in the study published in 2007 which used 2.5 mg of bevacizumab with similar favorable results (20) . The favorable effect of treatment observed in our study is also in agreement with the po sitive results obtained by others authors which used repeated 2.0 mg bevacizumab injections at three months interval in patients with central and hemicentral retinal vein occlusion (27) . While it seems clear that IVB injection has a shortterm beneficial effect, it is also clear from several studies that recurrence of ME is rather frequent (8,11,12) , and very often repeated injections are neces sary in patients with retinal vein occlusion.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Single intravitreal bevacizumab injection effects on contrast sensitivity in macular edema from branch retinal vein occlusion

Preti¹,

Ramirez²,

Pimentel³

et al. 2012

Arq. Bras. Oftalmol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of a single intravitreal bevacizumab injection on visual acuity, contrast sensitivity and optical coherence tomographymea su red cen tral macular thickness in eyes with macular edema from branch re tinal vein occlusion. Methods: Seventeen eyes of 17 patients with macular edema from unilateral branch retinal vein occlusion were treated with a single bevacizumab injection. Patients were submitted to a complete evaluation including best corrected visual acuity, contrast sensitivity and optical coherence tomography measurements before treatment and one and three months after injection. Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity and optical coherence tomography measurements were compared to baseline values. Results: Mean visual acuity measurement improved from 0.77 logMAR at baseli ne to 0.613 logMAR one month after injection (P=0.0001) but worsened to 0.75 logMAR after three months. Contrast sensitivity test demonstrated significant improvement at spatial frequencies of 3, 6, 12 and 18 cycles/degree one month after injection and at the spatial frequency of 12 cycles/degree three months after treatment. Mean ± standard deviation baseline central macular thickness (552 ± 150 µm) reduced sig ni ficantly one month (322 ± 127 µm, P=0.0001) and three mo nths (439 ± 179 µm, P=0.01) after treatment. Conclusions: Bevacizumab injection improves visual acuity and contrast sensitiv i t y and reduces central macular thickness one month after treatment. Visual acuity returns to baseline levels at the 3month followup, but some beneficial effect of the treatment is still present at that time, as evidenced by optical coherence tomographymea sured central macular thickness and contrast sensitivity measurements.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Single intravitreal bevacizumab injection effects on contrast sensitivity in macular edema from branch retinal vein occlusion

Preti¹,

Ramirez²,

Pimentel³

et al. 2012

Arq. Bras. Oftalmol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They inhibit the release of VEGF, contribute to the integrity of the inner blood-retinal barrier, reduce extravasation from leaking blood vessels, and have beneficial effect in the prevention and treatment of macular oedema. 20,26,27 The safety of intravitreal bevacizumab has been confirmed by previous animal studies and human trials, 28,29 and intravitreal injection of bevacizumab has recently been reported to be effective in macular oedema of various etiologies. 20,[30][31][32][33] Results of our study suggest that intravitreal bevacizumab injection appears to be effective in the primary treatment of DME.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 79%

Intravitreal bevacizumab (Avastin) for primary treatment of diabetic macular oedema

Özkırış

2008

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…16 Although intravitreal injection of bevacizumab has not received FDA approval, bevacizumab has been widely used off-label to treat VEGF-mediated ocular conditions such as choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration, diabetic macular edema, CRVO-associated macular edema and as an adjunctive agent in glaucoma surgery. [17][18][19][20][21] The outcomes of off-label treatment of NVG with intravitreal bevacizumab have been reported. [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] We have previously published a retrospective interventional case series of NVG eyes describing the natural history of NVG treated with intravitreal bevacizumab.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term outcomes of neovascular glaucoma treated with and without intravitreal bevacizumab

Olmos

Sayed

Moraczewski

et al. 2015

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims To compare the outcomes of neovascular glaucoma (NVG) treated with and without intravitreal bevacizumab in a large case comparison study. Methods The study is a retrospective, comparative, case series of 163 eyes of 151 patients with NVG, including 99 treated without and 64 treated with intravitreal bevacizumab. Medical and surgical treatments for NVG were assessed. The main outcome measures were visual acuity (VA) and intraocular pressure (IOP).Results At the time of NVG diagnosis, the median VA was count fingers (CF) in the non-bevacizumab group and 2/300 in the bevacizumab group. IOP (mean ± SD) was 43.1 ± 13.0 mm Hg in the non-bevacizumab group and 40.8 ± 11.5 mm Hg in the bevacizumab group. IOP (mean ± SD) decreased to 18.3 ± 13.8 mm Hg in the nonbevacizumab group and 15.3 ± 8.0 mm Hg in the bevacizumab group, and the median VA was CF in both treatment groups at a mean follow-up of 12 months. Panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) substantially reduced the need for glaucoma surgery (Po0.001) in bevacizumab treated NVG eyes. Conclusions Although bevacizumab delayed the need for glaucoma surgery, PRP was the most important factor that reduced the need for surgery. Vision and IOP in eyes with NVG treated with bevacizumab showed no long-term differences when compared with eyes that were not treated with bevacizumab. Thus, intravitreal bevacizumab serves as an effective temporizing treatment, but is not a replacement for close monitoring and definitive treatment of NVG. PRP remains the treatment modality that affects the course of NVG in terms of decreasing the need for surgery to control IOP.

show abstract

Intravitreal Bevacizumab (Avastin) for Central and Hemicentral Retinal Vein Occlusions

Abstract: Intravitreal bevacizumab injections of 2.0 mg at 12-week intervals were well tolerated and were associated with short-term BCVA stabilization or improvement and favorable macular changes in all patients with ischemic RVO and associated macular edema.

Cited by 168 publications

References 36 publications

Single intravitreal bevacizumab injection effects on contrast sensitivity in macular edema from branch retinal vein occlusion

Single intravitreal bevacizumab injection effects on contrast sensitivity in macular edema from branch retinal vein occlusion

Intravitreal bevacizumab (Avastin) for primary treatment of diabetic macular oedema

Long-term outcomes of neovascular glaucoma treated with and without intravitreal bevacizumab

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About