Intravitreal bevacizumab for proliferative diabetic retinopathy with new dense vitreous hemorrhage after full panretinal photocoagulation.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Sinawat S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3869503 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Intravitreal bevacizumab for proliferative diabetic retinopathy with new dense vitreous hemorrhage after full panretinal photocoagulation.
Sinawat S S Rattanapakorn T T Sanguansak T T Yospaiboon Y Y Sinawat S S
Eye (London, England) 20130913 12
<h4>Purpose</h4>To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injections for the treatment of proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) with new dense vitreous hemorrhage (VH) after previous full panretinal photocoagulation (PRP).<h4>Methods</h4>Prospective study of consecutive PDR with prior complete PRP patients, who presented with new dense VH, were treated with IVB injection. Complete ophthalmic examination and/or ocular ultrasonography were performed at baseline and 1 ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeTo evaluate the outcomes of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) use in patients with a vitreous hemorrhage (VH) secondary to proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR).DesignRetrospective, interventional case series.MethodsPatients who presented to Scheie Eye Institute between January 2008 and January 2015 with a new VH secondary to PDR and treated with IVB were included. Exclusion criteria consisted of IVB treatment prior to the study, a history of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV), and less than 1 year of follow-up. Outcomes of interest were additional treatments including PPV, injections, and panretinal photocoagulation (PRP), as well as visual acuity at baseline and at 1 year.ResultsOf the 111 eligible eyes, 55 (49.5%) had PRP, 35 (31.6%) were managed with injections alone, and 21 (18.9%) had PPV after 1 year. The overall average number of injections during this time was 2 (range, 1-9), and 13 (11.7%) eyes were managed with a single injection alone. Of the 69 eyes with 2 years of follow-up, 43 (62.3%) had PRP, 16 (23.2%) were treated with injections alone, and 10 (14.5%) had PPV.ConclusionsThis study underscores the potentially important role that IVB injections have in the management of patients with VH secondary to PDR. The results indicate that a proportion of patients may be treated with a minimal amount of intervention requiring 1 or 2 anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections only. Also, the rate of PPV at 2 years (27.9%, n = 31) suggests that most patients may be managed nonsurgically.
| S-EPMC5376507 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo compare efficacy and safety of intravitreal aflibercept (IVA) injection with panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) versus early vitrectomy for diabetic vitreous hemorrhage (VH).MethodsProspective, randomized study that included 34 eyes with diabetic VH. They were divided into two groups, Group Ι (17 eyes) received three successive IVA injections followed by PRP and group ΙΙ (17 eyes) for whom early vitrectomy was done. Follow up was carried out after one, two, three, six and nine months. The primary outcome measure was change in the mean best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) after nine months, secondary outcome measures were mean duration of clearance of VH and rate of recurrent hemorrhage with any additional treatment in both groups. Complications were reported.ResultsThere was no statistically significant difference regarding initial demographic criteria between both groups. The mean final log MAR BCVA was statistically better than the initial BCVA in both groups (0.51 ± 0.20, 1.17 ± 0.48 for group I and 0.48 ± 0.18, 1.44 ± 0.44 for group II, P < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference between both groups regarding the mean final Log Mar BCVA (0.51 ± 0.20 for group I, 0.48 ± 0.18 for group II, p ≥ 0.05), the mean duration of clearance of VH was 7.8 ± 1.8 weeks, 5 days for group I and II respectively. PRP was completely done for all eyes in group I after three months. The difference in the recurrence rate between group I (29.4%) and group II (11.8%) was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Vitrectomy was done for three eyes (17.6%) due to recurrent non-resolving VH in group I. late recurrent VH occurred in two eyes (11.8%) in group II, IVA was given with complete clearance of the hemorrhage. No vision threatening complications were reported in both groups.ConclusionBoth intravitreal injection of aflibercept followed by PRP and early vitrectomy are effective and safe modalities for treatment of diabetic vitreous hemorrhage. Early vitrectomy leads to faster vision gain with less incidence of recurrence than intravitreal injection.Trial registrationRandomized clinical trial under the number of NCT04153253 on November 6, 2019 "Retrospectively registered".
| S-EPMC7137269 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceVitreous hemorrhage from proliferative diabetic retinopathy can cause loss of vision. The best management approach is unknown.ObjectiveTo compare initial treatment with intravitreous aflibercept vs vitrectomy with panretinal photocoagulation for vitreous hemorrhage from proliferative diabetic retinopathy.Design, setting, and participantsRandomized clinical trial at 39 DRCR Retina Network sites in the US and Canada including 205 adults with vison loss due to vitreous hemorrhage from proliferative diabetic retinopathy who were enrolled from November 2016 to December 2017. The final follow-up visit was completed in January 2020.InterventionsRandom assignment of eyes (1 per participant) to aflibercept (100 participants) or vitrectomy with panretinal photocoagulation (105 participants). Participants whose eyes were assigned to aflibercept initially received 4 monthly injections. Both groups could receive aflibercept or vitrectomy during follow-up based on protocol criteria.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was mean visual acuity letter score (range, 0-100; higher scores indicate better vision) over 24 weeks (area under the curve); the study was powered to detect a difference of 8 letters. Secondary outcomes included mean visual acuity at 4 weeks and 2 years.ResultsAmong 205 participants (205 eyes) who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 57 [11] years; 115 [56%] men; mean visual acuity letter score, 34.5 [Snellen equivalent, 20/200]), 95% (195 of 205) completed the 24-week visit and 90% (177 of 196, excluding 9 deaths) completed the 2-year visit. The mean visual acuity letter score over 24 weeks was 59.3 (Snellen equivalent, 20/63) (95% CI, 54.9 to 63.7) in the aflibercept group vs 63.0 (Snellen equivalent, 20/63) (95% CI, 58.6 to 67.3) in the vitrectomy group (adjusted difference, -5.0 [95% CI, -10.2 to 0.3], P = .06). Among 23 secondary outcomes, 15 showed no significant difference. The mean visual acuity letter score was 52.6 (Snellen equivalent, 20/100) in the aflibercept group vs 62.3 (Snellen equivalent, 20/63) in the vitrectomy group at 4 weeks (adjusted difference, -11.2 [95% CI, -18.5 to -3.9], P = .003) and 73.7 (Snellen equivalent, 20/40) vs 71.0 (Snellen equivalent, 20/40) at 2 years (adjusted difference, 2.7 [95% CI, -3.1 to 8.4], P = .36). Over 2 years, 33 eyes (33%) assigned to aflibercept received vitrectomy and 34 eyes (32%) assigned to vitrectomy received subsequent aflibercept.Conclusions and relevanceAmong participants whose eyes had vitreous hemorrhage from proliferative diabetic retinopathy, there was no statistically significant difference in the primary outcome of mean visual acuity letter score over 24 weeks following initial treatment with intravitreous aflibercept vs vitrectomy with panretinal photocoagulation. However, the study may have been underpowered, considering the range of the 95% CI, to detect a clinically important benefit in favor of initial vitrectomy with panretinal photocoagulation.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02858076.
| S-EPMC7739132 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vascular endothelial growth factor plays a role in proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR). Intravitreal injection of saline has been shown potentially to lead to improved visual acuity compared with observation alone in eyes with vitreous hemorrhage. Therefore, it is important to determine if intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor can reduce vitrectomy rates (and risks associated with vitrectomy) compared with saline for vitreous hemorrhage from PDR that precludes placement or confirmation of complete panretinal photocoagulation.To evaluate intravitreal ranibizumab compared with intravitreal saline injections on vitrectomy rates for vitreous hemorrhage from PDR.Phase 3, double-masked, randomized, multicenter clinical trial. Data reported were collected from June 2010 to March 2012 and include 16 weeks of follow-up.Community-based and academic-based ophthalmology practices specializing in retinal diseases.Two hundred sixty-one eyes of 261 study participants, who were at least 18 years of age with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus. Study eyes had vitreous hemorrhage from PDR precluding panretinal photocoagulation completion.Eyes were randomly assigned to 0.5-mg intravitreal ranibizumab (n = 125) or intravitreal saline (n = 136) at baseline and 4 and 8 weeks.Cumulative probability of vitrectomy within 16 weeks.Cumulative probability of vitrectomy by 16 weeks was 12% with ranibizumab vs 17% with saline (difference, 4%; 95% CI, -4% to 13%) and of complete panretinal photocoagulation without vitrectomy by 16 weeks was 44% and 31%, respectively (P = .05). The mean (SD) visual acuity improvement from baseline to 12 weeks was 22 (23) letters and 16 (31) letters, respectively (P = .04). Recurrent vitreous hemorrhage occurred within 16 weeks in 6% and 17%, respectively (P = .01). One eye developed endophthalmitis after saline injection.Overall, the 16-week vitrectomy rates were lower than expected in both groups. This study suggests little likelihood of a clinically important difference between ranibizumab and saline on the rate of vitrectomy by 16 weeks in eyes with vitreous hemorrhage from PDR. Short-term secondary outcomes including visual acuity improvement, increased panretinal photocoagulation completion rates, and reduced recurrent vitreous hemorrhage rates suggest biologic activity of ranibizumab. Long-term benefits remain unknown. Whether vitrectomy rates after saline or ranibizumab injection are different than observation alone cannot be determined from this study.The study is listed on www.clinicaltrials.gov, under identifier NCT00996437 (website registration date October 14, 2009).
| S-EPMC4217122 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IMPORTANCE:Panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) is the standard treatment for reducing severe visual loss from proliferative diabetic retinopathy. However, PRP can damage the retina, resulting in peripheral vision loss or worsening diabetic macular edema (DME). OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the noninferiority of intravitreous ranibizumab compared with PRP for visual acuity outcomes in patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:Randomized clinical trial conducted at 55 US sites among 305 adults with proliferative diabetic retinopathy enrolled between February and December 2012 (mean age, 52 years; 44% female; 52% white). Both eyes were enrolled for 89 participants (1 eye to each study group), with a total of 394 study eyes. The final 2-year visit was completed in January 2015. INTERVENTIONS:Individual eyes were randomly assigned to receive PRP treatment, completed in 1 to 3 visits (n?=?203 eyes), or ranibizumab, 0.5 mg, by intravitreous injection at baseline and as frequently as every 4 weeks based on a structured re-treatment protocol (n?=?191 eyes). Eyes in both treatment groups could receive ranibizumab for DME. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:The primary outcome was mean visual acuity change at 2 years (5-letter noninferiority margin; intention-to-treat analysis). Secondary outcomes included visual acuity area under the curve, peripheral visual field loss, vitrectomy, DME development, and retinal neovascularization. RESULTS:Mean visual acuity letter improvement at 2 years was +2.8 in the ranibizumab group vs +0.2 in the PRP group (difference, +2.2; 95% CI, -0.5 to +5.0; P?<?.001 for noninferiority). The mean treatment group difference in visual acuity area under the curve over 2 years was +4.2 (95% CI, +3.0 to +5.4; P?<?.001). Mean peripheral visual field sensitivity loss was worse (-23 dB vs -422 dB; difference, 372 dB; 95% CI, 213-531 dB; P?<?.001), vitrectomy was more frequent (15% vs 4%; difference, 9%; 95% CI, 4%-15%; P?<?.001), and DME development was more frequent (28% vs 9%; difference, 19%; 95% CI, 10%-28%; P?<?.001) in the PRP group vs the ranibizumab group, respectively. Eyes without active or regressed neovascularization at 2 years were not significantly different (35% in the ranibizumab group vs 30% in the PRP group; difference, 3%; 95% CI, -7% to 12%; P?=?.58). One eye in the ranibizumab group developed endophthalmitis. No significant differences between groups in rates of major cardiovascular events were identified. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:Among eyes with proliferative diabetic retinopathy, treatment with ranibizumab resulted in visual acuity that was noninferior to (not worse than) PRP treatment at 2 years. Although longer-term follow-up is needed, ranibizumab may be a reasonable treatment alternative, at least through 2 years, for patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy. TRIAL REGISTRATION:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01489189.
| S-EPMC5567801 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe purpose of this study was to study the effects of panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) and intravitreal aflibercept on retinal vessel oxygen saturations, area of retinal nonperfusion, and area of neovascularization in proliferative diabetic retinopathy.MethodsThis is a prospective randomized single center study. Forty patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy were randomized to PRP or intravitreal aflibercept treatment for 52 weeks. Retinal oximetry and ultra-widefield angiography were performed at baseline and week 52. Ultra-widefield color fundus imaging was performed at baseline, week 12, and week 52. The outcomes were retinal arterio-venous oximetry differences (AVD), area of retinal nonperfusion, and area of neovascularization in disc areas (DA).ResultsThe AVD in the PRP group increased from 36.7% at baseline to 39.7%, whereas it decreased from 33.4% to 32.5% in the aflibercept group. The difference in AVD between groups at week 52 was 4.0% (95% confidence interval, -0.08, 8.8; P = 0.10). The baseline mean area of retinal nonperfusion of 125.1 DA and 131.2 DA in the PRP and aflibercept groups increased to 156.1 DA and 158.4 DA, respectively, at week 52 (P = 0.46). The median baseline area of neovascularization decreased from 0.98 DA to 0.68 DA in the PRP group and from 0.70 DA to 0 DA in the aflibercept group at week 12 (P = 0.019). At week 52, this measured 0.24 DA in the PRP group and 0 DA in the aflibercept group (P = 0.45).ConclusionsIntravitreal aflibercept achieved an earlier and complete regression of neovascularization in proliferative diabetic retinopathy compared with PRP. There were no significant differences in global change in intravascular oxygen saturation or areas of retinal nonperfusion between the two groups by 52 weeks.
| S-EPMC6108778 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:To compare rates and identify predictive factors for events that represent worsening of proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) in eyes treated with panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) or ranibizumab. DESIGN:Randomized clinical trial (55 United States sites). PARTICIPANTS:Three hundred ninety-four study eyes from 305 adults with PDR, visual acuity (VA) 20/320 or better, and no history of PRP. INTERVENTION:Panretinal photocoagulation or intravitreous ranibizumab injections (0.5 mg/0.05 ml). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Time from randomization to a composite PDR-worsening outcome defined as the first occurrence of vitreous hemorrhage, retinal detachment, anterior segment neovascularization, or neovascular glaucoma. RESULTS:Through 2 years, the cumulative probability of worsening PDR was 42% (PRP) versus 34% (ranibizumab; hazard ratio [HR], 1.33; 99% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 to 1.98; P = 0.063). Worse baseline levels of diabetic retinopathy severity (Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study scale) were associated with increased risk of worsening PDR, regardless of treatment group (64% [high-risk PDR or worse] vs. 23% [moderate PDR or better]; HR, 3.97; 99% CI, 2.48 to 6.36; P < 0.001). In the PRP group, eyes receiving pattern scan versus conventional single-spot PRP also were at higher risk for worsening PDR (60% vs. 39%; HR, 2.04; 99% CI, 1.02 to 4.08; P = 0.008), regardless of the number of spots placed or the number of sittings to complete the initial PRP. Eyes in both groups with vision-impairing (VA 20/32 or worse) center-involved diabetic macular edema (DME) at baseline were required to receive ranibizumab for center-involved DME. Therefore the composite outcome was compared by treatment in the subgroup of eyes that did not have vision-impairing center-involved DME at baseline. For these eyes, the rate of PDR-worsening was greater with PRP than ranibizumab (45% vs. 31%; HR, 1.62; 99% CI, 1.01 to 2.60; P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS:In eyes with PDR, ranibizumab resulted in less PDR worsening compared with PRP, especially in eyes not required to receive ranibizumab for center-involved DME. Although anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy requires a more frequent visit schedule than PRP, these findings provide additional evidence supporting the use of ranibizumab as an alternative therapy to PRP for PDR, at least through 2 years.
| S-EPMC6648671 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo identify baseline factors associated with change in visual acuity or development of vision-impairing central-involved diabetic macular edema (DME) over 2 years when treating proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) with ranibizumab or panretinal photocoagulation (PRP).DesignPost hoc analyses of randomized, multicenter clinical trial data.ParticipantsEyes completing the 2-year visit (n = 328) or without vision-impairing central-involved DME at baseline (n = 302) in Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network Protocol S.MethodsIntravitreous ranibizumab (0.5 mg/0.05 ml) or PRP.Main outcome measuresChange in visual acuity (area under the curve) and development of vision-impairing (20/32 or worse) central-involved DME over 2 years.ResultsAfter multivariable model selection with adjustment for baseline visual acuity and central subfield thickness, no factors were identified as associated with change in visual acuity or development of vision-impairing central-involved DME within the ranibizumab group. In the PRP group, worse change in visual acuity was more likely with higher hemoglobin A1c level (-0.6 letters per 1% increase; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.2 to -0.1 letters; continuous P = 0.03), more severe diabetic retinopathy (difference between high-risk PDR or worse vs. moderate PDR or better, -2.8 letters [95% CI, -5.5 to -0.2 letters]; continuous P = 0.003), and higher mean arterial pressure (difference between ≥100 mmHg vs. <100 mmHg, -2.0 letters [95% CI, -4.6 to 0.5 letters]; continuous P = 0.009). Development of vision-impairing central-involved DME was more likely with higher hemoglobin A1c level (hazard ratio [HR] per 1% increase, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.13-1.52]; continuous P < 0.001), more severe diabetic retinopathy (HR for high-risk PDR or worse vs. moderate PDR or better, 1.46 [95% CI, 0.73-2.92]; continuous P = 0.03), and the presence of cystoid abnormalities within 500 μm of the macula center (HR, 2.90 [95% CI, 1.35-6.24]; P = 0.006).ConclusionsFor eyes managed with PRP, higher hemoglobin A1c level and more severe diabetic retinopathy were associated with less vision improvement and an increased risk of vision-impairing central-involved DME developing. When managing PDR with ranibizumab, eyes gained vision, on average, with no baseline characteristics identified as associated with visual acuity or central-involved DME outcomes.
| S-EPMC6566865 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:To compare patient-centered outcomes in patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) treated with ranibizumab vs panretinal photocoagulation (PRP). DESIGN:Randomized clinical trial. METHODS:Setting: Multicenter (55 U.S. sites). PATIENT POPULATION:Total of 216 adults with 1 study eye out of 305 adults (excluding participants with 2 study eyes, because each eye received a different treatment) with PDR, visual acuity 20/320 or better, no history of PRP. INTERVENTION:Ranibizumab (0.5 mg/0.05 mL) vs PRP. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Change from baseline to 2 years in composite and prespecified subscale scores from the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25 (NEI VFQ-25), University of Alabama Low Luminance Questionnaire (UAB-LLQ), and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAIQ). RESULTS:For the NEI VFQ-25 and UAB-LLQ composite scores, ranibizumab-PRP treatment group differences (95% CI) were +4.0 (-0.2, +8.3, P = .06) and +1.8 (-3.5, +7.1, P = 0.51) at 1 year, and +2.9 (-1.5, +7.2, P = .20) and +2.3 (-2.9, +7.5, P = .37) at 2 years, respectively. Work productivity loss measured with the WPAIQ was 15.6% less with ranibizumab (-26.3%, -4.8%, P = .005) at 1 year and 2.9% (-12.2%, +6.4%, P = .54) at 2 years. Eighty-three ranibizumab participants (97%) were 20/40 or better in at least 1 eye (visual acuity requirement to qualify for an unrestricted driver's license in many states) at 2 years compared with 82 PRP participants (87%, adjusted risk ratio = 1.1, 95% CI: 1.0, 1.2, P = .005). CONCLUSIONS:Though differences in some work productivity and driving-related outcomes favored ranibizumab over PRP, no differences between treatment regimens for PDR were identified for most of the other patient-centered outcomes considered.
| S-EPMC5215763 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Ranibizumab is a viable treatment option for eyes with proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) through 2 years. However, longer-term results are needed. Objective:To evaluate efficacy and safety of 0.5-mg intravitreous ranibizumab vs panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) over 5 years for PDR. Design, Setting, and Participants:Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network multicenter randomized clinical trial evaluated 394 study eyes with PDR enrolled February through December 2012. Analysis began in January 2018. Interventions:Eyes were randomly assigned to receive intravitreous ranibizumab (n?=?191) or PRP (n?=?203). Frequency of ranibizumab was based on a protocol-specified retreatment algorithm. Diabetic macular edema could be managed with ranibizumab in either group. Main Outcomes and Measures:Mean change in visual acuity (intention-to-treat analysis) was the main outcome. Secondary outcomes included peripheral visual field loss, development of vision-impairing diabetic macular edema, and ocular and systemic safety. Results:The 5-year visit was completed by 184 of 277 participants (66% excluding deaths). Of 305 enrolled participants, the mean (SD) age was 52 (12) years, 135 (44%) were women, and 160 (52%) were white. For the ranibizumab and PRP groups, the mean (SD) number of injections over 5 years was 19.2?(10.9) and 5.4?(7.9), respectively; the mean (SD) change in visual acuity letter score was 3.1?(14.3) and 3.0?(10.5) letters, respectively (adjusted difference,?0.6; 95% CI, -2.3 to 3.5; P?=?.68); the mean visual acuity was 20/25 (approximate?Snellen equivalent) in both groups at 5 years. The mean (SD) change in cumulative visual field total point score was -330?(645) vs -527?(635) dB in the ranibizumab (n?=?41) and PRP (n?=?38) groups, respectively (adjusted difference,?208 dB; 95% CI, 9-408). Vision-impairing diabetic macular edema developed in 27 and 53 eyes in the ranibizumab and PRP groups, respectively (cumulative probabilities: 22% vs 38%; hazard ratio,?0.4; 95% CI, 0.3-0.7). No statistically significant differences between groups in major systemic adverse event rates were identified. Conclusions and Relevance:Although loss to follow-up was relatively high, visual acuity in most study eyes that completed follow-up was very good at 5 years and was similar in both groups. Severe vision loss or serious PDR complications were uncommon with PRP or ranibizumab; however, the ranibizumab group had lower rates of developing vision-impairing diabetic macular edema and less visual field loss. Patient-specific factors, including anticipated visit compliance, cost, and frequency of visits, should be considered when choosing treatment for patients with PDR. These findings support either anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy or PRP as viable treatments for patients with PDR. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01489189.
| S-EPMC6233839 | biostudies-literature