Yuan Shiman,Liu Danning,Zhou Xiyuan.Vitreous cavity injection of ranibizumab vs its combination with triamcinolone acetonide in treatment of repeated or continuous CRVO-ME[J].J Amry Med Univ (J Third Mil Med Univ),2015,37(17):1787-1791.
Yuan Shiman,Liu Danning,Zhou Xiyuan.Vitreous cavity injection of ranibizumab vs its combination with triamcinolone acetonide in treatment of repeated or continuous CRVO-ME[J].J Amry Med Univ (J Third Mil Med Univ),2015,37(17):1787-1791.DOI:
Vitreous cavity injection of ranibizumab vs its combination with triamcinolone acetonide in treatment of repeated or continuous CRVO-ME
Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of intravitreal injection of ranibizumab (R) alone and its combination with triamcinolone acetonide (TA) in the treatment of repeated or continuous central retinal vein occlusion accompanied by macular edema (CRVO-ME). Methods In the controlled clinical study
38 patients (40 eyes) with repeated or continuous CRVO-ME were injected with R 0.5 mg in the vitreous cavity for the first time. They were randomly divided into an R group and an R+TA group under the condition of patients’ informed consent. In the R group
20 patients (22 eyes) performed injection of R 0.5 mg
and in R+TA group
18 patients (18 eyes) performed vitreous injection of R 0.5 mg and TA 1 mg. Based on the result of optical coherence tomography
the patients received repeated vitreous injection when the macular center concave retinal thickness was larger than 250 μm. The best corrected visual acuity (BCVA)
central macular thickness (CMT)
and intraocular pressure of each group in 1
2
3
4
5
and 6 month after corresponding treatment were detected
and the slit lamp and indirect ophthalmoscopic examinations were performed to compare the changes of CMT and BCVA. Results Both CMT and BCVA of each group were improved significantly after treatment
with statistically significant difference (P0.05)
but all the indicators had no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (P0.05). Besides
the frequency for injection was 2.61±0.92 times in the R+TA group and 4.05±0.65 times in the R group
and the difference between the 2 groups was statistically significant (P0.01). No complications were found in the R group
but 2 cases of elevated intraocular pressure and 1 case of cortical cataract were observed in the R+TA group. Conclusion The intravitreal injection of R alone and R+TA in the treatment of repeated or continuous CRVO-ME can reduce ME and improve eye sight
but the therapeutic effect has no significant difference between the 2 methods. R+TA therapy can reduce the frequency of injection
but it may increase the risks of cataract and glaucoma.