In the expert consensus published by the Pediatrics in 2013, it was first proposed that anti-VEGF drugs can be considered for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) with stage 3, zone Ⅰ with plus disease. However, there are many problems worth the attention of ophthalmologists, including the advantages and disadvantages of anti-VEGF therapy compared with traditional laser therapy, systemic and ocular complications after anti-VEGF therapy, and what indicators are the end points of anti-VEGF therapy. Combined with this consensus and numerous research findings, we recommend that the first treatment for anti-VEGF or laser therapy should be considered from disease control effects. For the threshold and pre-threshold lesions, the effect of anti-VEGF therapy for zoneⅡ lesions is better than that for zone Ⅰ lesions and the single-time effective rate is high. So, it is suggested that anti-VEGF therapy should be preferred for the first treatment. The choice of repeat treatment should be considered from the final retinal structure and functional prognosis. Laser therapy is advisable for the abnormal vascular regression slower and abnormalities in the posterior pole. It can reduce the number of reexaminations and prolong the interval between re-examinations. However, the premature use of laser has an inevitable effect on peripheral vision field. Excluding the above problems, supplemental therapy can still choose anti-VEGF therapy again. Most of the children with twice anti-VEGF therapy are sufficient to control the disease. Anti-VEGF therapy should be terminated when there are signs such as plus regression, threshold or pre-threshold lesions controlled without recurrence, peripheral vascularization, etc.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of photodynamic therapy (PDT) and intravitreal vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors in the treatment of polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV), and to investigate the primary treatment tentatively. MethodsA systematic search of Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and the Wanfang Data was performed to identify all comparative studies that compared the outcomes of PDT alone, intravitreal VEGF inhibitors alone and combined intravitreal VEGF inhibitors and photodynamic therapy. Outcomes of interest included the regression and recurrence rate of polypoidal lesions, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central retinal thickness (CRT), therapeutic times, and the occurrence rate of adverse events. 2 randomized controlled trials (RCT) and 19 non-RTCs were identified. According to treatment methods, the data extracted was classified to 3 groups, analyzed with odds ratio (OR), weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95%confidence interval (95%CI). ResultsMeta-analysis suggests that the regression rate of polypoidal lesions (OR=0.34, 0.07; 95%CI=0.13-0.88, 0.02-0.36) and BCVA (WMD=0.25, 0.11; 95%CI=0.14-0.36, 0.01-0.21) in combined therapy group were significantly better than those in PDT group and intravitreal VEGF inhibitors group (P < 0.05). The recurrence rate of polypoidal lesions in PDT group was significantly lower than intravitreal VEGF inhibitors group (OR=0.35, 95%CI=0.16-0.74, P=0.006). BCVA (P=0.025) and the occurrence rate of adverse events (OR=60.36, 95%CI=6.04-603.50, P=0.000 5) in intravitreal VEGF inhibitors group were significant better than PDT group. ConclusionsCombined treatment appeared to be superior to PDT alone or intravitreal VEGF inhibitors alone. Combined treatment takes priority over all others in the primary treatment of PCV.
Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) drugs, including monoclonal antibodies (such as bevacizumab and ranibizumab) and fusion protein agents (such as aflibercept and conbercept) have been clinically proven to be effective to treat exudative age-related macular degeneration AMD). However, there are still some patients do not or poorly respond to the initial anti-VEGF agents, usually after several injections, ophthalmologists may switch to another anti-VEGF agent. In general, switching of anti-VEGF agent is considered for recurrent AMD, AMD resistance to anti-VEGF treatments. Current switching protocols include the replacement of monoclonal antibodies with fusion protein agents, the replacement of fusion protein agents with monoclonal antibodies, the substitution of one monoclonal antibody with another one, and the replacement of monoclonal antibodies with fusion protein agents and switching back with monoclonal antibodies. However, current researches on the switching of anti-VEGF drugs for exudative AMD are mostly retrospective and single-arm studies, and there are some differences in the results of different studies. Therefore, for patients with exudative AMD who do not respond to or respond poorly to anti-VEGF drugs, the efficacy of switching of anti-VEGF drugs is uncertain right now. Switching of anti-VEGF agents may improve the retinal anatomical outcome of the affected eye but may not necessarily improve visual acuity. Thus it is an option in the clinical practice to treat AMD. To determine the benefits of above mentioned switching regimens, randomized controlled clinical trials with large sample number and long study period will be needed.
ObjectiveTo assess the clinical efficacy of vitrectomy with intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) at different injection time for proliferative diabeticretinopathy (PDR). MethodsThis was a prospective, comparative, and randomized study. Ninety-seven eyes of 97 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to three different treatment groups: 30 eyes (30 patients) in the preoperative IVR group, 32 eyes (32 patients) in the intraoperative IVR group and 35 eyes (35 patients) in the no IVR injection group. The best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) (F=0.18) and the grading of vitreous hemorrhage (χ2=1.39) before surgery did not differ significantly among the 3 groups, respectively (P > 0.05). All eyes enrolled underwent conventional 23-gauge pars plana vitrectomy (PPV). The preoperative IVR group received intravitreal 0.5 mg/0.05 ml ranibizumab injection 3 to 7 days before PPV, intraoperative IVR group received intravitreal 0.5 mg/0.05 ml ranibizumab injection at the end of PPV and non-drug injection group received PPV only. Postoperative BCVA, fundus color photography, optical coherence tomography examination was performed in all eyes at 1 week and 1, 3, 6, 9, 12 months after surgery. Early RVH was defined as RVH occurred within 1 week to 1 month postoperatively; while late RVH was defined as RVH occurred 1 month later after the operation. ResultsThe mean BCVA were all improved among the 3 groups compared with the preoperative vision at 1 month after operation. At the beginning of 3 months after surgery, the average BCVA of the preoperative injection group and the intraoperative injection group tended to stable; while 3 eyes in the non-drug injection group began to decreased. There was no significant difference in average BCVA at 1, 3 and 12 months of follow-up periods among the 3 groups (F=1.42, 1.17, 0.26; P > 0.05). The incidences of early RVH were 16.7%, 9.4%, 28.6% in the preoperative injection group, intraoperative injection group, and non-drug injection group, respectively (χ2=5.12, P < 0.05). The incidence of early RVH in the intraoperative injection group reduced compared to preoperative injection group and non-drug injection group (χ2=4.04, 4.93; P < 0.05). The incidences of late RVH were 13.3%, 9.4%, 14.3% in preoperative injection group, intraoperative injection group, and non-drug injection group, respectively (χ2=0.47, P > 0.05). The average centeral foveal thickness (CFT) decreased among the 3 groups in different degrees at 1 month when compared with that of 1 week after operation and the decreasing was statistically significant (F=59.50, P < 0.05). A subgroup pairwise analysis showed no significant difference of decreasing CFT in preoperative injection group compared with that of intraoperative injection group (t=0.23, P > 0.05). The average CFT of the 3 groups had different degrees of thickening at 3, 6, 9, 12 months after surgery, and the increasingof CFT among the 3 groups were not differ significantly (F=2.92, 2.86, 3.07, 3.12; P > 0.05). ConclusionsThe adjunctive use of IVR can reduce the incidence of early postoperative RVH in vitrectomy for PDR, decrease in macular thickness and obtain favorable visual recovery. The effect of preoperative IVR injection was slightly better than that of the intraoperative IVR injection.
ObjectiveTo observe the different effect of 23G vitrectomy surgery assisted with intravitreal injection of ranibizumab and pan-retina photocoagulation in severe proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) treatment. MethodsA total of 60 patients (78 eyes) with severe PDR diagnosed were enrolled and divided into intravitreal injection of Lucentis group (Group A, 22 patients, 28 eyes), pan-retina photocoagulation group (Group B, 18 patients, 20 eyes) and control group (Group C, 20 patients, 30 eyes), all of them received 23G vitreoretinal surgery. The average operation time, iatrogenic hiatus, the use of filler and electric coagulation, postoperative bleeding and best corrected visual acuity in three months were comparatively analyzed among the three groups. ResultsThe operation time in the three group was (67.429±11.243), (77.762±10.435), (106.839±20.724) min respectively, the differences of A vs C and B vs C were statistically significant(t=8.940, 5.928; P < 0.05). Five eyes needed electric coagulation in Group A, 6 eyes in Group B, and 24 eyes in Group C, the differences of A vs C and B vs C were all statistically significant (χ2=19.955, 10.505;P < 0.05). Four eyes used the filler in Group A, 3 eyes in Group B, and 23 eyes in Group C, the differences of A vs C and B vs C were all statistically significant (χ2=18.099, 14.083;P < 0.05). The difference of iatrogenic hiatus and postoperative bleeding was no significance among the three groups (P > 0.05). The best corrected visual acuity of 3 months after surgery in the three group is (0.383±0.122), (0.251±0.067), (0.104±0.044) respectively, the differences of A vs C and B vs C were all statistically significant(t=11.909, 13.616;P < 0.05). ConclusionThe intravitreaI injection of ranibizumab or pan-retina photocoagulation treatment before the vitrectomy surgery is very effective, both of them can shorten the operation time, reduce electric coagulation and use of filler, and improve patients' eyesight.
Objective To compare the clinic therapeutic effect of intravitreal ranibizumab injection versus photodynamic therapy (PDT) combined with intravitreal ranibizumab injection for idiopathic choroidal neovascularizatio (ICNV), and to investigate the clinical effect and safety of treatment. Methods A randomized controlled clinical prospective study was performed for 27 patients (27 eyes) diagnosed as ICNV. Fourteen patients were assigned to receive PDT and intravitreal ranibizumab injection (combination roup.n=14); the control group was treated with only intravitreal ranibizumab injection (single group, n=13).The combination group was treated with an intravitreal injection of ranibizumab (0.5 mg/0.05 ml) 1 week after PDT. The bestcorrected visual acuity (BCVA) (logMAR), examination of the ocular fundus, fluorescence fundus angiography (FFA), indocyanine green angiography (ICGA) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) were performed respectively at 1, 2, 3, 6 and 12 months after treatment. If choroidal neovascularization (CNV) was only partially regressed or the leakage went on during follow-up, those patients were re-injected with ranibizumab. Results After 12 months, the average vision is 0.22plusmn;0.11 in single group, and 0.21plusmn;0.12 in combination group, and the differences were not significant (t=0.187, P=0.853). In single group FFA and ICGA showed completely closed CNV in 10 eyes (77.92%), and almost closed CNV in 3 eyes (23.08%) with obvious reduction of fluorescence leakage. In combination group FFA and ICGA showed completely closed CNV in 12 eyes (85.71%), and almost closed CNV in 2 eyes (14.29%) with obvious reduction of fluorescence leakage; OCT showed the subretinal fluid absorption and reduction of CNV. The average macular retinal thickness (MRT) in single groups is （167.96plusmn;10.69） m, and in combination groups is （171.64plusmn;11.30）m. In single and combination groups MRT decreased significantly at the final follow-up, but no significant differences in both groups (t=-0.887.P=0.389). The average number of intravitreal injection was （1.5plusmn;0.7） in combination group and （2.4plusmn;1.0） in single group (t=2.821，P=0.009). There were no ocular or systemic adverse events observed except for one patient with subconjunctival hemorrhage in the single group.Conclusions Intravitreal ranibizumab injection and PDT combined with intravitreal bevacizumab injection are both effective and safe for the patients with ICNV. The combined therapy can induce CNV regression, fundus hemorrhage and exudation absorption more effectively, and have less recurred CNV and side effects.