{"title":"在 S.方案公布后,对泛视网膜光凝术和雷尼珠单抗的历史和使用情况进行回顾和分析。","authors":"Serena Shah, Brandon Chou, Marissa Patel, Arjun Watane, Lea Shah, Nicolas Yannuzzi, Jayanth Sridhar","doi":"10.1097/ICU.0000000000001076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>We describe the history, utilization, and series results of panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) and ranibizumab and provide an analysis of PRP and ranibizumab usage before versus after the publication of the 2-year and 5-year results of the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network (DRCR.net) Protocol S trial.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Number of ranibizumabs performed began to increase and number of PRPs performed began to decrease in 2016. After publication of the 2-year results, there was significant negative trend in PRP services and significant positive trend in ranibizumab services (both P < 0.001). After publication of the 5-year results, there was significant negative trend in PRP services (P = 0.003). There were significant negative trends (all P < 0.001) in reimbursement factors for PRP from 2013 to 2020: average work RVU (wRVU), nonfacility physical expense RVU, facility PE RVU, malpractice RVU (MP RVU).</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Both PRP and ranibizumab have undergone numerous trials comparing their efficacy to other treatment options or no treatment at all. The publication of the 2-year results of Protocol S was associated with an increase in utilization of ranibizumab and decrease in utilization of PRP, with continued decrease after the publication of the 5-year results.</p>","PeriodicalId":50604,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Ophthalmology","volume":"35 5","pages":"369-375"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Review and analysis of history and utilization of panretinal photocoagulation and ranibizumab after publication of protocol S.\",\"authors\":\"Serena Shah, Brandon Chou, Marissa Patel, Arjun Watane, Lea Shah, Nicolas Yannuzzi, Jayanth Sridhar\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/ICU.0000000000001076\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>We describe the history, utilization, and series results of panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) and ranibizumab and provide an analysis of PRP and ranibizumab usage before versus after the publication of the 2-year and 5-year results of the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network (DRCR.net) Protocol S trial.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Number of ranibizumabs performed began to increase and number of PRPs performed began to decrease in 2016. After publication of the 2-year results, there was significant negative trend in PRP services and significant positive trend in ranibizumab services (both P < 0.001). After publication of the 5-year results, there was significant negative trend in PRP services (P = 0.003). There were significant negative trends (all P < 0.001) in reimbursement factors for PRP from 2013 to 2020: average work RVU (wRVU), nonfacility physical expense RVU, facility PE RVU, malpractice RVU (MP RVU).</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Both PRP and ranibizumab have undergone numerous trials comparing their efficacy to other treatment options or no treatment at all. The publication of the 2-year results of Protocol S was associated with an increase in utilization of ranibizumab and decrease in utilization of PRP, with continued decrease after the publication of the 5-year results.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50604,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Ophthalmology\",\"volume\":\"35 5\",\"pages\":\"369-375\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/ICU.0000000000001076\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ICU.0000000000001076","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Review and analysis of history and utilization of panretinal photocoagulation and ranibizumab after publication of protocol S.
Purpose of review: We describe the history, utilization, and series results of panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) and ranibizumab and provide an analysis of PRP and ranibizumab usage before versus after the publication of the 2-year and 5-year results of the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network (DRCR.net) Protocol S trial.
Recent findings: Number of ranibizumabs performed began to increase and number of PRPs performed began to decrease in 2016. After publication of the 2-year results, there was significant negative trend in PRP services and significant positive trend in ranibizumab services (both P < 0.001). After publication of the 5-year results, there was significant negative trend in PRP services (P = 0.003). There were significant negative trends (all P < 0.001) in reimbursement factors for PRP from 2013 to 2020: average work RVU (wRVU), nonfacility physical expense RVU, facility PE RVU, malpractice RVU (MP RVU).
Summary: Both PRP and ranibizumab have undergone numerous trials comparing their efficacy to other treatment options or no treatment at all. The publication of the 2-year results of Protocol S was associated with an increase in utilization of ranibizumab and decrease in utilization of PRP, with continued decrease after the publication of the 5-year results.
期刊介绍:
Current Opinion in Ophthalmology is an indispensable resource featuring key up-to-date and important advances in the field from around the world. With renowned guest editors for each section, every bimonthly issue of Current Opinion in Ophthalmology delivers a fresh insight into topics such as glaucoma, refractive surgery and corneal and external disorders. With ten sections in total, the journal provides a convenient and thorough review of the field and will be of interest to researchers, clinicians and other healthcare professionals alike.