Optic nerve head perfusion changes in eyes with proliferative diabetic retinopathy treated with intravitreal ranibizumab or photocoagulation: a randomized controlled trial.

Ahmed Magdy Raffat Helmy, Mohammad Ahmad Rashad, Hesham Mohamed Gharieb, Wael Adel Gomaa, Rania Gamal Eldin Zaki
{"title":"Optic nerve head perfusion changes in eyes with proliferative diabetic retinopathy treated with intravitreal ranibizumab or photocoagulation: a randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Ahmed Magdy Raffat Helmy,&nbsp;Mohammad Ahmad Rashad,&nbsp;Hesham Mohamed Gharieb,&nbsp;Wael Adel Gomaa,&nbsp;Rania Gamal Eldin Zaki","doi":"10.51329/mehdiophthal1459","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) is a serious sight-threatening disease, and half of the patients with high-risk PDR can develop legal blindness within 5 years, if left untreated. This study was aimed at comparing panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) and intravitreal ranibizumab injections in terms of radial peripapillary capillary (RPC) density on optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) in patients with treatment-naive PDR.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This open-label, prospective, randomized clinical trial included 50 patients with treatment-naive PDR with optic disc neovascularization and randomized them into two groups: group 1, with patients undergoing two sessions of PRP 2 weeks apart, and group 2, with patients received three intravitreal ranibizumab injections (0.5 mg) 1 month apart for 3 consecutive months. Patients underwent a full ophthalmological examination, including best-corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA) measurement in the logarithm of minimal angle of resolution (logMAR) notation and OCTA before intervention and monthly after the last laser session or the first intravitreal ranibizumab injection for 3 months of follow-up. Visual field (VF) was tested at the beginning and end of 3 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-two (84%) eyes completed the 3-month follow-up, including 22 eyes in the PRP group (88%) and 20 (80%) eyes in the ranibizumab group. The two groups were comparable in terms of demographic characteristics, diabetes duration, baseline BCDVA, glycated hemoglobin level, OCTA parameters, VF indices, and intraocular pressure (all <i>P</i> > 0.05). The RPC density change from baseline to the 3-month follow-up was significantly lower in the PRP group than in the ranibizumab group (mean difference in RPC density change: - 3.61%; 95% confidence interval: - 5.57% to - 1.60%; <i>P</i> = 0.001). The median (interquartile range) logMAR change from baseline to the 3-month follow-up (0.0 [0.2]) was significantly higher in the PRP group than in the ranibizumab group (- 0.15 [0.3]; <i>P</i> < 0.05). The median changes in central foveal thickness from baseline to the 3-month follow-up differed significantly between the two groups (<i>P</i> = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In eyes with PDR and neovascularization of the disc RPC density on OCTA increased in the ranibizumab group and decreased in the PRP group. Visual acuity gain was higher in the ranibizumab group than in the PRP group. Future multicenter trials addressing our limitations are required to verify the findings of this study.</p>","PeriodicalId":36524,"journal":{"name":"Medical Hypothesis, Discovery, and Innovation in Ophthalmology","volume":"11 4","pages":"144-150"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/29/9b/mehdiophth-11-151.PMC10460245.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Hypothesis, Discovery, and Innovation in Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51329/mehdiophthal1459","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) is a serious sight-threatening disease, and half of the patients with high-risk PDR can develop legal blindness within 5 years, if left untreated. This study was aimed at comparing panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) and intravitreal ranibizumab injections in terms of radial peripapillary capillary (RPC) density on optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) in patients with treatment-naive PDR.

Methods: This open-label, prospective, randomized clinical trial included 50 patients with treatment-naive PDR with optic disc neovascularization and randomized them into two groups: group 1, with patients undergoing two sessions of PRP 2 weeks apart, and group 2, with patients received three intravitreal ranibizumab injections (0.5 mg) 1 month apart for 3 consecutive months. Patients underwent a full ophthalmological examination, including best-corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA) measurement in the logarithm of minimal angle of resolution (logMAR) notation and OCTA before intervention and monthly after the last laser session or the first intravitreal ranibizumab injection for 3 months of follow-up. Visual field (VF) was tested at the beginning and end of 3 months.

Results: Forty-two (84%) eyes completed the 3-month follow-up, including 22 eyes in the PRP group (88%) and 20 (80%) eyes in the ranibizumab group. The two groups were comparable in terms of demographic characteristics, diabetes duration, baseline BCDVA, glycated hemoglobin level, OCTA parameters, VF indices, and intraocular pressure (all P > 0.05). The RPC density change from baseline to the 3-month follow-up was significantly lower in the PRP group than in the ranibizumab group (mean difference in RPC density change: - 3.61%; 95% confidence interval: - 5.57% to - 1.60%; P = 0.001). The median (interquartile range) logMAR change from baseline to the 3-month follow-up (0.0 [0.2]) was significantly higher in the PRP group than in the ranibizumab group (- 0.15 [0.3]; P < 0.05). The median changes in central foveal thickness from baseline to the 3-month follow-up differed significantly between the two groups (P = 0.001).

Conclusions: In eyes with PDR and neovascularization of the disc RPC density on OCTA increased in the ranibizumab group and decreased in the PRP group. Visual acuity gain was higher in the ranibizumab group than in the PRP group. Future multicenter trials addressing our limitations are required to verify the findings of this study.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
玻璃体内雷尼珠单抗或光凝治疗增殖性糖尿病视网膜病变患者眼部视神经头灌注改变:一项随机对照试验
背景:增殖性糖尿病视网膜病变(PDR)是一种严重的视力威胁疾病,如果不及时治疗,一半的高风险PDR患者可在5年内发展为法定失明。本研究旨在比较全视网膜光凝(PRP)和玻璃体内注射雷尼单抗在光学相干断层扫描血管造影(OCTA)上对首次治疗的PDR患者的径向乳头周围毛细血管(RPC)密度的影响。方法:这项开放标签、前瞻性、随机临床试验纳入了50例首次治疗的PDR伴视盘新生血管患者,并将其随机分为两组:1组患者间隔2周接受两次PRP治疗,2组患者间隔1个月接受3次玻璃体内雷尼珠单抗注射(0.5 mg),连续3个月。患者接受了全面的眼科检查,包括干预前和最后一次激光治疗或第一次玻璃体内注射雷尼单抗后每月进行的最佳矫正距离视力(BCDVA)测量(最小分辨角对数)和OCTA,随访3个月。在3个月的开始和结束时检测视野(VF)。结果:42只眼(84%)完成了3个月的随访,其中PRP组22只眼(88%),雷尼单抗组20只眼(80%)。两组在人口学特征、糖尿病病程、基线BCDVA、糖化血红蛋白水平、OCTA参数、VF指数和眼压方面具有可比性(均P > 0.05)。PRP组RPC密度从基线到随访3个月的变化明显低于雷尼单抗组(RPC密度变化的平均差异:- 3.61%;95%置信区间:- 5.57%至- 1.60%;P = 0.001)。PRP组从基线到3个月随访的logMAR变化中位数(四分位间距)(0.0[0.2])显著高于雷尼单抗组(- 0.15 [0.3];P < 0.05)。从基线到随访3个月,两组中央中央凹厚度的中位数变化差异显著(P = 0.001)。结论:在PDR和椎间盘新生血管形成的眼睛中,雷尼单抗组OCTA上RPC密度增加,PRP组降低。雷尼单抗组的视力增加高于PRP组。需要未来的多中心试验来解决我们的局限性,以验证本研究的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊最新文献
Crocus sativus (saffron) and age-related macular degeneration. Application and interpretation of linear-regression analysis. Intraretinal hyperreflective line: potential biomarker in various retinal disorders. Multifocal electroretinogram changes after panretinal photocoagulation in early proliferative diabetic retinopathy. One-year outcomes after intraocular collamer lens implantation in hyperopic astigmatism: a retrospective single-center study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1