Comparison of the effect of ranibizumab and dexamethasone implant in diabetic macular edema with concurrent epiretinal membrane.

Autor:	Cakir A; Department of Ophthalmology, University of Health Sciences, Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey. Electronic address: dracakir@gmail.com., Erden B; Department of Ophthalmology, University of Health Sciences, Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey., Bolukbasi S; Department of Ophthalmology, University of Health Sciences, Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey., Aydin A; Clinique Universitaire d'Ophtalmologie, Faculté de Médecine, Université d'Istanbul Medipol, Fatih Caddesi, Yenibosna, Istanbul, Turkey., Yurttaser Ocak S; Department of Ophthalmology, University of Health Sciences, Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey., Maden G; Department of Ophthalmology, University of Health Sciences, Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey., Elcioglu MN; Department of Ophthalmology, University of Health Sciences, Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Journal francais d'ophtalmologie [J Fr Ophtalmol] 2019 Sep; Vol. 42 (7), pp. 683-689. Date of Electronic Publication: 2019 May 12.
DOI:	10.1016/j.jfo.2019.02.007
Abstrakt:	Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of intravitreal ranibizumab (RZB) injections and intravitreal dexamethasone (DEX) implant in diabetic macular edema (DME) with concurrent epiretinal membrane (ERM). Methods: This was a retrospective, observational, comparative study. Medical records of DME patients with concurrent ERM were retrospectively reviewed. Seventeen eyes of 16 patients treated with 3 consecutive monthly RZB injections (RZB group) and 22 eyes of 18 patients treated with a DEX implant (DEX group) were included. The groups were compared at baseline, 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th months in terms of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and intraocular pressure (IOP). Results: Eighteen of the 39 eyes (46.1%) were phakic at baseline, 9 (52.9%) of which were treated with RZB, whereas 9 (40.9%) were treated with DEX implant (P=0.528). Although CMT improved significantly in both the RZB and DEX groups (P<0.001); the trend was different (P=0.003). The mean change in CMT at 1month in the DEX group was greater (DEX: 188.2±142.7μm; RZB: 95.7±110.7μm; P=0.034); it was in favor of RZB group at the 3rd and 4th months (DEX: -52.7±86.9μm; RZB: 1.4±31.4μm; P=0.012. DEX: -63±67.3μm; RZB: -5.8±43.9μm; P=0.004, respectively). BCVA improved significantly in both groups (P<0.001). There was no statistical difference between the groups with regard to gain in BCVA or IOP change throughout the study period (P=0.572, P=0.064, respectively). Conclusion: Both RZB and DEX are effective in improving anatomical and visual outcomes in DME with concurrent ERM. The DEX group was associated with a prompt anatomic response, but with a gradual decrease from 3rd month. (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu