2009Chinese Journal of Practical OphthalmologyRequires access

Intravitreal triamcinolone versus bevacizumab for the treatment of macular edema in retinal vein occlusion

Tong Qian, Xiaoxin Li, Hong Yin

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Objective To compare the efficiency ofintravitreal injection oftriamcinolone acetonide or bevacizumab for the treatment ofmaeular edema in retinal vein occlusion. Methods One hundred and sixteen eyes of 116 patients with macular edema of retinal vein occlusion were diagnosed by examination of regular inspection, fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA) and optic coherence tomography (OCT). There were 75 patients in TA group and 41 patients in bevacizumab group. One hundred and sixteen patients received intravitreal injection of either 4mg/0. 1ml of triamcinolone acetonide or 1.25mg/0.05ml of bevacizumab. There were no significant differences between the two groups with regards to patients' age, duration of disease, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT) at baseline. Comprehensive ophthalmic evaluation was performed at baseline and at weeks 4, 8 and 12 after treatment. Main outcome measures included CMT measured with OCT and BCVA. Results Separate within-group analysis of showed significant improvement in BCVA from baseline in TA group at weeks 4 (P=0.000)、8 (P=0.000)、12 (P=0.000), and at weeks 4 (P=0.000), 8 (P=0.000) in bevacizumab group. The results showed significant reduction in CMT in TA group at weeks 4(P=0.000), 8(P=0.000), 12(P=0.004), and at weeks 4(P=0.003), 8(P=0.000) in bevacizumab group. But no significant interaction between groups were observed for BCVA at weeks 4(P=0.985), 8(P=0.989), 12(P=0.306) and for CMT at weeks 4(P=0.075), 8(P=0.453), 12(P=0.583). There was a significant increase in IOP in the TA group when compared with the bevacizumab group. Conclusion The result in our observation showed that intravitreai injection of either triamcinolone acetonide or bevacizumab was well tolerated with a significant improvement in BCVA and decrease in macular edema for patients with retinal vein occlusion. A randomly controlled multi-center clinical triai is necessary. Key words: Bevacizumab;  Triamcinolone acetonide;  Macular edema;  Retinal vein occlusion

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Objective To compare the efficiency ofintravitreal injection oftriamcinolone acetonide or bevacizumab for the treatment ofmaeular edema in retinal vein occlusion. Methods One hundred and sixteen eyes of 116 patients with macular edema of retinal vein occlusion were diagnosed by examination of regular inspection, fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA) and optic coherence tomography (OCT). There were 75 patients in TA group and 41 patients in bevacizumab group. One hundred and sixteen patients received intravitreal injection of either 4mg/0. 1ml of triamcinolone acetonide or 1.25mg/0.05ml of bevacizumab. There were no significant differences between the two groups with regards to patients' age, duration of disease, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT) at baseline. Comprehensive ophthalmic evaluation was performed at baseline and at weeks 4, 8 and 12 after treatment. Main outcome measures included CMT measured with OCT and BCVA. Results Separate within-group analysis of showed significant improvement in BCVA from baseline in TA group at weeks 4 (P=0.000)、8 (P=0.000)、12 (P=0.000), and at weeks 4 (P=0.000), 8 (P=0.000) in bevacizumab group. The results showed significant reduction in CMT in TA group at weeks 4(P=0.000), 8(P=0.000), 12(P=0.004), and at weeks 4(P=0.003), 8(P=0.000) in bevacizumab group. But no significant interaction between groups were observed for BCVA at weeks 4(P=0.985), 8(P=0.989), 12(P=0.306) and for CMT at weeks 4(P=0.075), 8(P=0.453), 12(P=0.583). There was a significant increase in IOP in the TA group when compared with the bevacizumab group. Conclusion The result in our observation showed that intravitreai injection of either triamcinolone acetonide or bevacizumab was well tolerated with a significant improvement in BCVA and decrease in macular edema for patients with retinal vein occlusion. A randomly controlled multi-center clinical triai is necessary. Key words: Bevacizumab;  Triamcinolone acetonide;  Macular edema;  Retinal vein occlusion

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Objective To compare the efficiency ofintravitreal injection oftriamcinolone acetonide or bevacizumab for the treatment ofmaeular edema in retinal vein occlusion. Methods One hundred and sixteen eyes of 116 patients with macular edema of retinal vein occlusion were diagnosed by examination of regular inspection, fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA) and optic coherence tomography (OCT). There were 75 patients in TA group and 41 patients in bevacizumab group. One hundred and sixteen patients received intravitreal injection of either 4mg/0. 1ml of triamcinolone acetonide or 1.25mg/0.05ml of bevacizumab. There were no significant differences between the two groups with regards to patients' age, duration of disease, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT) at baseline. Comprehensive ophthalmic evaluation was performed at baseline and at weeks 4, 8 and 12 after treatment. Main outcome measures included CMT measured with OCT and BCVA. Results Separate within-group analysis of showed significant improvement in BCVA from baseline in TA group at weeks 4 (P=0.000)、8 (P=0.000)、12 (P=0.000), and at weeks 4 (P=0.000), 8 (P=0.000) in bevacizumab group. The results showed significant reduction in CMT in TA group at weeks 4(P=0.000), 8(P=0.000), 12(P=0.004), and at weeks 4(P=0.003), 8(P=0.000) in bevacizumab group. But no significant interaction between groups were observed for BCVA at weeks 4(P=0.985), 8(P=0.989), 12(P=0.306) and for CMT at weeks 4(P=0.075), 8(P=0.453), 12(P=0.583). There was a significant increase in IOP in the TA group when compared with the bevacizumab group. Conclusion The result in our observation showed that intravitreai injection of either triamcinolone acetonide or bevacizumab was well tolerated with a significant improvement in BCVA and decrease in macular edema for patients with retinal vein occlusion. A randomly controlled multi-center clinical triai is necessary. Key words: Bevacizumab;  Triamcinolone acetonide;  Macular edema;  Retinal vein occlusion

Key concepts: Medicine, Triamcinolone acetonide, Bevacizumab, Macular edema, Ophthalmology, Visual acuity, Retinal Vein, Fundus (uterus)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Intravitreal triamcinolone versus bevacizumab for the treatment of macular edema in retinal vein occlusion — Research Paper | ScholarLens