OUTCOMES OF PRO RE NATA VERSUS TREAT-AND-EXTEND ANTI-VASCULAR ENDOTHELIAL GROWTH FACTOR INJECTIONS FOR MYOPIC MACULAR NEOVASCULARIZATION IN MULTIETHNIC PATIENTS IN THE UNITED STATES.

Abstract

Purpose: To compare visual outcomes and recurrence rates between pro re nata (PRN), treat-and-extend and stop (TES), and treat-and-extend with chronic maintenance dosing (TEM) regimens of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (vascular endothelial growth factor) injections for myopic macular neovascularization (MNV) in multiethnic patients.

Methods: This retrospective study included patients treated with PRN, TES, or TEM for myopic MNV using intravitreal bevacizumab or ranibizumab. The primary outcome measure was visual improvement at 12 months.

Results: Overall, 127 eyes of 117 patients (75 women and 42 men) were included. The mean follow-up duration was 37.9 months. The outcomes of PRN (47 eyes [37%]), TES (52 eyes [41%]), and TEM (28 eyes [22%]) were compared. All groups showed significant visual improvement at 12 months and at the final follow-up (all P < 0.05). Visual outcomes did not differ significantly between the three groups at 12 months and the final follow-up (all P > 0.05). However, the number of eyes with recurrences was significantly higher in the PRN group and significantly lower in the TEM group during the follow-up (38%, 21%, and 11% in the PRN, TES, and TEM groups, respectively; P = 0.020). The PRN group received the fewest injections during follow-up (5.3, 10.9, and 19.9 injections in the PRN, TES, and TEM groups, respectively; P < 0.001).

Conclusion: Comparing myopic MNV treatment regimens, anti-VEGF injections with PRN, TES, or TEM are effective for myopic MNV and have comparable visual outcomes. Because PRN provides favorable outcomes with fewer injections, it should be the first-line approach. However, a treat-and-extend approach with TES and TEM may be an option given individual patient factors.