Diffuse diabetic macular oedema treated with intravitreal bevacizumab or triamcinolone acetonide

Intravitreal bevacizumab versus intravitreal triamcinolone for diabetic macular edema-Systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression

BACKGROUND

The most frequent cause of vision loss from diabetic retinopathy is diabetic macular edema (DME). Earlier clinical trials tried to examine the role of intravitreal triamcinolone (IVT) and intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) in DME; they either qualified IVT over IVB or IVB over IVT or did not exhibit a significant difference.

OBJECTIVE

This paper aims to compare the efficacy and safety of IVB versus IVT alone or combined IVB+IVT in the treatment of DME.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, CENTRAL, Scopus, Embase, Science Direct, OVID, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials of IVB versus IVT alone or combined IVB+IVT and IVT versus the combined IVB+IVT in DME patients.

RESULTS

A total of 1243 eyes of 17 trials were included in our meta-analysis and regression. Repeated injections of IVB were superior at improving VA comparing with those of IVT at 12, 24, 48-weeks, and IVB+IVT at 12, 24, 48-weeks. Single injections were comparable across the three arms regarding BCVA improvement. CMT reductions were also comparable across the three arms. Meanwhile, the overall safety regarding intraocular pressure and intraocular hypertension significantly favored the IVB group. Improvement in VA was best modified with CMT reduction from 480 um to 320um. This association was significant at 12-weeks in the three arms and persisted till 24-weeks and 48-weeks exclusively in the IVB group.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Our analysis reveals that repeated successive injections associate with better BCVA compared to single injection. Current evidence affirms that IVB is superior to IVT and IVB+IVT at improving BCVA, comparable at reducing CMT, and presents a better safety profile in the treatment of DME.

Comparison of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide versus intravitreal bevacizumab as the primary treatment of clinically significant macular edema

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the short-term efficacy of triamcinolone acetonide versus bevacizumab for the treatment of diabetic, clinically significant, macular edema with different optical coherence tomography findings.

METHODS

Fifty eyes of 45 consecutive patients with diabetic, clinically significant, macular edema were incorporated in this prospective interventional case series. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to findings on optical coherence tomography: 1) macular edema combined with serous retinal detachment (Group 1), 2) diffused macular thickening (Group 2), and 3) cystoid macular edema (Group 3). Patients from each group were treated with a single intravitreal injection of triamcinolone (IVTA) or 2 intravitreal injections of bevacizumab (IVB) with an interval of 6 weeks. Patients were observed at 6, 12, and 24 weeks after IVTA or the first IVB injection. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal thickness (CRT) were examined at each visit. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to compare the efficacy of the treatment groups.

RESULTS

In Group 1, IVTA showed more favorable effects on CRT reduction and BCVA improvement compared with IVB at 6, 12, and 24 weeks (P = 0.002, 0.001, 0.027 and P = 0.036, 0.001, 0.027), respectively. In Group 2, IVB had more CRT reduction than IVTA at 6 and 12 weeks (P = 0.013 and 0.036), although there was no significant difference in BCVA improvement between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). In Group 3, IVTA and IVB did not have significant effects on CRT reduction and BCVA improvement (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The short-term efficacy of IVTA and IVB on treating clinically significant macular edema varied with different optical coherence tomography findings. In clinically significant macular edema combined with serous retinal detachment, IVTA may be more favorable than IVB in CRT reduction and BCVA improvement. In patients with diffused macular thickening, IVB may be better than IVTA in macular thickness reduction, although this does not translate to a significant improvement in BCVA.

Comparison of intravitreal bevacizumab and triamcinolone acetonide theraphies for diffuse diabetic macular edema

AIM

To compare therapeutic effects of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) versus intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injections for bilateral diffuse diabetic macular edema (DDME).

METHODS

Forty eyes of 20 patients with bilateral DDME participated in this study. For each patient, 4 mg/0.1 mL IVTA was injected to one eye and 2.5 mg/0.1 mL IVB was injected to the other eye. The effects of injection for diabetic macular edema (DME) were evaluated using best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT) by optical coherence tomography (OCT) and intraocular pressure (IOP) by applanation tonometer. Patients underwent eye examinations, including BCVA, CMT, and IOP at pre-injection, 1, 4, 8, 12 and 24wk after injection. During the follow-up, second injections were performed to eyes which have CMT greater than 400 µm at 12wk for salvage therapy.

RESULTS

BCVA (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) at pre-injection, 1, 4, 8, 12 and 24wk after injection was 0.71±0.19, 0.62±0.23, 0.63±0.12, 0.63±0.13, 0.63±0.14 and 0.61±0.24 in the IVTA group and 0.68±0.25, 0.61±0.22, 0.60±0.24, 0.62±0.25, 0.65±0.26 and 0.59±0.25 in the IVB group, respectively. CMT (µm) at pre-injection, 1, 4, 8, 12 and 24wk after injection was 544±125, 383±96, 335±87, 323±87, 333±92, 335±61 in the IVTA group and 514±100, 431±86, 428±107, 442±106, 478±112, 430±88 in the IVB group respectively. Reduction ratios of mean CMT were 29% at 1wk, 38% at 4wk, 40% at 8wk, 38% at 12wk, and 38% at 24wk in the IVTA group. Second IVTA injections were performed to the 6 eyes (30%) at 12wk. Reduction ratios of mean CMT were 16% at 1wk, 17% at 4wk, 14% at 8wk, 7% at 12wk, and 16% at 24wk in the IVB group. Second IVB injections were performed to the 15 eyes (75%) at 12wk.

CONCLUSION

This study showed earlier and more frequent macular edema recurrences in the eyes treated with bevacizumab compared with the ones treated with triamcinolone acetonide. Triamcinolone acetonide was found to provide more efficient and long-standing effect in terms of reducing CMT compared with the bevacizumab.

Comparative Effectiveness of Intravitreal Bevacizumab With or Without Triamcinolone Acetonide for Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema

Background: Bevacizumab and triamcinolone acetonide (TA) are both common choices for treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME), but the comparative efficacy of combined or separate applications is still not determined. Objectives: To compare the treatment efficacy of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) and the combination of IVB and intravitreal triamcinolone (IVT) for DME patients. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library were systematically reviewed for randomized controlled trials comparing IVB with IVB/IVT. Data on visual acuity (VA) and central macular thickness (CMT) changes at 3 and 6 months were extracted and data on adverse events were collected. A meta-analysis was performed using the software RevMan 5.3. The methodological quality and bias risks were also evaluated. Results: VA improved more significantly in the IVB/IVT group compared with the IVB group at 3 months (mean difference [MD] = 0.07; 95% CI = 0.01 to 0.13), whereas there was no significant difference at 6 months (MD = −0.01; 95%CI = −0.11 to 0.09). The CMT reduction in the IVB/IVT group was significantly greater than that in the IVB group at 3 months (MD = 48.40; 95%CI = 30.23 to 66.57), but no statistically significant difference was found at 6 months (MD = 0.47; 95%CI = −24.11 to 25.04). Ocular hypertension was detected in 9/243 eyes in the IVB/IVT group but none of the IVB eyes. Conclusion: IVB/IVT is more effective for improving VA and decreasing CMT at 3 months in DME. A single injection of TA along with the first IVB could improve outcome within 3 months, but this is not sustained at 6 months. Continuous IVT/IVB treatment should be performed in further trials to clarify its long-term potential efficacy.

Intravitreal triamcinolone versus intravitreal bevacizumab for diabetic macular edema: a meta-analysis

AIM

To compare the efficacy of the sole intravitreal triamcinolone (IVT) versus intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) alone or IVB combined with IVT in the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME).

METHODS

Pertinent publications were identified through systematic searches of database and manually searching. Methodological quality of the literatures was valuated according to the Jadad Score. RevMan 5.1.0 was used to do the meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was determined and sensitivity was conducted.

RESULTS

Six studies were ultimately included in the meta-analysis. The results of our analysis showed IVT had a statistically significant improvement in vision over the IVB at 1 month and 3 months (P<0.01). However, the reduction was not significant regarding central macular thickness (CMT) during the earlier (1 month and 3 months) follow-up period (P=0.12, P=0.41, respectively). At later visit (6 months), IVT had a significant decrease in CMT when compared to IVB (P<0.01) while no significant improvement in visual acuity (VA) was observed (P=0.14). The incidence of intraocular hypertension was 13/102 in IVT group during follow-up period while 0/103 in IVB group. The difference was significant (P<0.01). With regards to IVT versus IVB combined with IVT, there were no significant differences in CMT at 1 month (P=0.86) and 3 months (P=0.06). The incidence of intraocular hypertension was 6/67 in IVT group during follow-up period while 4/66 in IVB+IVT group. But the difference was not significant (P=0.53).

CONCLUSION

Current evidence shows IVT is superior in improving VA at earlier follow-up (1 month and 3 months) and in reducing CMT at later follow-up (6 months) for DME. At other time, it is in favor of IVT treatment but there are no statistically significances. However, IVT has the side-effect of ocular hypertension. There is no adequate evidence of the benefit adding IVB to IVT in contrast to IVT alone.

Treatment options for diffuse diabetic macular edema

PURPOSE

To describe the current management of diffuse diabetic macular edema (DDME).

METHODS

Review and discussion of the literature regarding DDME.

RESULTS

Diffuse diabetic macular edema is a condition that can be managed by means of several treatment options, including focal/grid laser photocoagulation, intravitreal or periocular corticosteroids, intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and vitrectomy with or without internal limiting membrane peeling.

CONCLUSIONS

Even though there is no randomized clinical trial specifically designed to assess the best treatment approach for DDME, new therapeutic approaches based on intravitreal injections of corticosteroid and anti-VEGF molecules offer new hope for its management.

Comparison of intravitreal bevacizumab alone or combined with triamcinolone versus triamcinolone in diabetic macular edema: a randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

To compare the effect of an intravitreal injection of bevacizumab alone (IVB) or combined with triamcinolone (IVB/IVT) versus triamcinolone (IVT) in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME).

METHODS

In this randomized three-arm clinical trial, eligible eyes were assigned randomly to one of the three study arms: the IVB group, 2 injections of 1.25 mg of bevacizumab with 6-week intervals; the IVB/IVT group, 1.25 mg of IVB with 2 mg of IVT, and the IVT group, 2 mg of IVT. The clinical course of best-corrected visual acuity and central macular thickness by optical coherence tomography was monitored for up to 12 months after the initial injection.

RESULTS

One hundred eleven eyes of 105 patients with DME completed 12 months of follow-up. The IVB/IVT group and the IVT group showed better visual acuity and reduced central macular thickness at 6 weeks and 3 months, compared with the IVB group (p = 0.041, p = 0.02 at 6 weeks; p = 0.045, p = 0.043 at 3 months, respectively). However, no significant difference in visual acuity and central macular thickness was observed between the three groups at 12 months (p = 0.088, p = 0.132, respectively). The frequency of retreatment was lower in the IVB/IVT and IVT groups during the 12-month period (p < 0.001). No significant differences in visual acuity or central macular thickness were observed between the IVB/IVT and IVT groups during the follow-up.

CONCLUSION

IVB/IVT and IVT showed more pronounced effects during the earlier postinjection period. However, levels of visual acuity or central macular thickness at 12 months were comparable in the three study groups. No beneficial effect of the combination injection was observed.

Intravitreal bevacizumab vs intravitreal triamcinolone combined with macular laser grid for diffuse diabetic macular oedema

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the 12-month clinical outcome of patients with persistent non-ischaemic diffuse diabetic macular oedema (DME) treated with intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) or with intravitreal injection of triamcinolone combined with macular laser grid (IVTA-MLG) from September 2005 to February 2008.

METHODS

Retrospective interventional comparative study. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA, ETDRS LogMAR scale) and foveal thickness (FT) at optical coherence tomography (OCT) were obtained at baseline and during 12 months after first treatment. Re-treatment was based on clinical or OCT-based evidence of persistent macular oedema or deterioration in visual acuity.

RESULTS

Forty-three eyes (32 patients) with DME were treated with IVB. Ninety-six eyes (52 patients) with DME were treated with combined laser grid treatment and intravitreal triamcinolone. At baseline, mean BCVA and FT were 0.92+/-0.34 LogMAR and 372+/-22 microm in the IVTA-MLG group, and 1.07+/-0.49 LogMAR and 423+/-33 microm in the IVB group, respectively. At 1- and 3-month visits, BCVA and FT had significantly improved in both groups. After 6 and 12 months, the IVB group experienced a statistically significant improvement in visual acuity (0.83+/-0.21 LogMAR, P<0.001 at 6 months; BCVA 0.86+/-0.24 LogMAR, P<0.001 at 12 months) and FT (248+/-18 microm, P<0.001 at 6 months; 262+/-28 microm, P=0.001 at 12 months) when compared with baseline, whereas the IVTA-MLG group did not show statistically significant improvement in vision and FT. An increase in intraocular pressure (IOP) was present in 10 of 96 (10.4%) eyes treated with IVTA-MLG, and in two cases it was resistant to topical treatment. No significant side effects were reported in the IVB group.

CONCLUSIONS

At 6 and 12 months after first treatment for chronic DME IVB provided significant improvement of BCVA and FT, whereas improvement after IVTA-MLG was not significant. Increased IOP occurred in 10.4% of patients who received IVTA, with two patients requiring trabeculectomy.