Intravitreal bevacizumab combined with grid photocoagulation in recurrent macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion

Comparison of the efficiency of anti-VEGF drugs intravitreal injections treatment with or without retinal laser photocoagulation for macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: To compare the efficiency of anti-VEGF drugs intravitreal injections(IVI) treatment with or without retinal laser photocoagulation(LPC) for macular edema(ME) secondary to retinal vein occlusion(RVO).

Methods: The randomized controlled trials and retrospective studies including anti-VEGF drug IVI combined with retinal LPC and single IVI in the treatment of macular edema secondary to RVO were collected in PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. We extracted the main outcome indicators including the best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness(CMT), the number of injections and the progress of retinal non-perfusion areas(NPAs) for systematic evaluation, to observe whether IVI + LPC could be more effective on the prognosis of RVO. We use Review Manager 5.4 statistical software to analyze the data

Results: 527 articles were initially retrieved. We included 20 studies, with a total of 1387 patients who were divided into the combination(IVI + LPC) treatment group and the single IVI group. All the patients completed the ocular examination including BCVA, slit-lamp test, fundus examination and Optical Coherence Tomography(OCT) test before and after each treatment. There was no statistical difference between the combination treatment group and single IVI group on BCVA(WMD = 0.12,95%CI = -3.54–3.78,p = 0.95),CMT(WMD = -4.40,95%CI = -21.33–12.53,p = 0.61) and NPAs(WMD = 0.01,95%CI = -0.28–0.30,p = 0.94).However, the number of IVI was decreased significantly in the combination treatment group in BRVO patients, compared to that in the single IVI group(WMD = -0.69,95%CI = -1.18∼-0.21,p = 0.005).

Conclusion: In the treatment of RVO patients with macular edema, the combination of IVI and retinal LPC neither improves BCVA nor reduces CMT significantly compared with the single IVI treatment. However, the combination treatment can decrease the number of intravitreal injections in patients with BRVO, while it is not observed in CRVO patients.

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

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).

Conclusions

Our study suggests that ranibizumab combined with macular laser is effective in the treatment of ME secondary to BRVO after 1 year of treatment with 3 + PRN regimen. However, combination of macular grid photocoagulation showed no beneficial anatomical or functional effect during follow-up period, nor did it reduce the number of ranibizumab injections, either in ischemic group or non-ischemic group. We suggest that there is no need to combine macular grid photocoagulation in the treatment of ME secondary to BRVO in the future.

Trial registration

Clinical Trials NCT03054766. https://register.clinicaltrials.gov.Prospectively registered.

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

BACKGROUND

The objective of the study was the investigation of the effects of intravitreal bevacizumab (BEV) with or without additional macular grid laser photocoagulation (GRID) for macular edema (ME) secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO).

METHODS

Prospective, randomized, monocentric study. Thirty-two patients were included. Initially, all eyes in both groups received three monthly injections of BEV, followed by additional injections if re-treatment criteria were met. In the BEV + GRID group, photocoagulation was performed 2 weeks after the first BEV injection and laser re-treatment was allowed. The follow-up was 38 weeks. Main outcome measures were best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal thickness (CRT). Changes of foveal avascular zone (FAZ) and of retinal ischemia, as well as the number of injections were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Sixteen eyes were randomized into each group. At baseline, BCVA was similar in both groups (BEV + GRID: 20/71; BEV: 20/60; P = 0.51). At 38 weeks, BCVA significantly improved in the two groups (BEV + GRID gain of 9 ± 11.2 letters and 16.25 ± 10.08 letters in the BEV) with no difference between them (P < 0.06). With regard to anatomical findings, initial CRT in BEV + GRID was 496.2 μm ± 138.4 μm and 538.9 μm ± 156.9 μm in BEV (P < 0.1697). At 38 weeks, CRT decreased in both groups significantly, 98.2 μm in the BEV + GRID (P = 0.02) and 141.7 μm in the BEV group (P = 0.01), with no significant difference between groups (P < 0.17). The area of FAZ a significantly increased in both groups (41% (P = 0.04) in BEV + GRID; 35% (P = 0.03) in BEV) during the study and the grade of peripheral ischemia remained unchanged. The mean number of injections was 3.8 (range 3-6) with no significant difference between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data demonstrate a beneficial effect of bevacizumab in ME in eyes with BRVO. A loading phase of three injections led to a significant improvement in vision in both groups, which persisted at week 38. Additional grid laser photocoagulation exhibited no beneficial functional or anatomical effect during the study, nor did it reduce the number of injections. The FAZ area increased significantly in both groups, but overall retinal ischemia did not. Further studies investigating more numerous eyes and longer follow-up are needed to confirm these data.

Risk factors of recurrence of macular oedema associated with branch retinal vein occlusion after intravitreal bevacizumab injection

BACKGROUND/AIMS

To identify risk factors of recurrence of macular oedema in branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) after intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injection.

METHODS

The records of 63 patients who underwent IVB injection for macular oedema secondary to BRVO with at least 6 months of follow-up were reviewed. Patients were evaluated at baseline with fluorescein angiography (FA), optical coherence tomography (OCT) and ultra-wide-field fundus photography (WFP). During follow-up, OCT and WFP were repeated. The area of retinal haemorrhage, central retinal thickness (CRT), area (mm²) of capillary non-perfusion within the 1 mm (NPA1), 1-3 mm and 6 mm zones of the ETDRS circle, foveal capillary filling time, degree (°) of foveal capillary network destruction and FA pattern were analysed.

RESULTS

Macular oedema recurred in 41 of 63 (65.1%) eyes after initial IVB injection. A binary logistic regression model showed that NPA1 (OR=434.97; 95% CI=5.52 to 34262.12, p=0.006) and initial CRT (OR=1.004; 95% CI=1.000 to 1.008, p=0.015) were significantly associated with the recurrence of macular oedema. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis identified an NPA1 of 0.36 mm² (AUC: 0.735, sensitivity: 70.7%; specificity: 63.6%) and an initial CRT of 570 µm (AUC: 0.745, sensitivity: 63.4%; specificity: 77.3%) as cut-off values for predicting recurrence of macular oedema.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with BRVO with non-perfusion of more than half of the 1 mm zone of the ETDRS circle or with an initial CRT >570 µm should be closely monitored for macular oedema recurrence within 6 months of IVB injection.

Effect of leaking capillaries and microaneurysms in the perifoveal capillary network on resolution of macular edema by anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of leaking capillaries and microaneurysms (MAs) in the perifoveal capillary network (PCN) on the treatment of fovea-involving macular edema (ME) secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) by intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) injections combined with focal, grid, and scatter laser photocoagulation.

METHODS

Retrospective comparative case series. The MA (+) group consisted of 12 patients with leaking MAs in the PCN and the MA (-) group contained 11 patients without. At 6 months following the initial IVR injection, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was evaluated as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included central macular thickness (CMT) and the number of IVR injections performed in a pro re nata (PRN) regimen when CMT was ≥300 µm and vision deteriorated by 0.1 logMAR or greater.

RESULTS

Mean BCVA improved by 0.30 ± 0.25 logMAR in the MA (-) group and 0.28 ± 0.20 logMAR in the MA (+) group (both P < 0.0001). Mean CMT was reduced by 237.6 ± 221.4 µm (P < 0.0001) in the MA (-) and 158.2 ± 152.1 µm (P < 0.01) in the MA (+) group. The degrees of improvement in BCVA (P = 0.74) and CMT (P = 0.33) did not vary significantly between the groups. The mean number of additional IVR injections was significantly less in the MA (-) group than in the MA (+) group (2.2 ± 1.0 vs 3.0 ± 0.8; P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Although leaking MAs and capillaries in the PCN did not adversely affect improvements in BCVA and CMT, these manifestations led to an increased number of IVR injections needed to sustain resolution of ME involving the fovea.