Comparison of intravitreal bevacizumab upload followed by a dexamethasone implant versus dexamethasone implant monotherapy for retinal vein occlusion with macular edema.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the efficacy and safety of three intravitreal bevacizumab upload injections followed by a dexamethasone implant versus dexamethasone implant monotherapy in eyes with macular edema due to retinal vein occlusion.


METHODS
Sixty-four eyes of 64 patients were included in this prospective, consecutive, nonrandomized case series: group 1 consisted of 38 patients (22 with central retinal vein occlusion, CRVO, 16 with branch retinal vein occlusion, BRVO) treated using a dexamethasone implant (Ozurdex) alone; group 2 consisted of 26 patients (14 CRVO, 12 BRVO) treated with three consecutive intravitreal bevacizumab injections at monthly intervals followed by a dexamethasone implant. In case of recurrence, both cohorts received further dexamethasone implants. Preoperatively and monthly best corrected visual acuity (BCVA, ETDRS), central retinal thickness (Spectralis-OCT), intraocular pressure, and wide-angle fundus photodocumentation (Optomap) were performed. The primary clinical endpoint was BCVA at 6 months after initiation of therapy. Secondary endpoints were central retinal thickness and safety of the therapy applied.


RESULTS
In group 1, an increase in BCVA of 2.5 (±1.6) letters in the CRVO and of 13.0 (±3.2) letters in BRVO patients was seen after 6 months, in group 2 of 5.9 (±0.4) letters (CRVO) and 3.8 (±2.4) letters (BRVO), which was not statistically significant. When comparing the two treatment groups with respect to the type of vein occlusion, there was a significant advantage for BRVO patients for the dexamethasone implant monotherapy (BRVO patients in group 1, p = 0.005). Central retinal thickness showed a significant reduction after 6 months only in patients of group 1, both for CRVO (p = 0.01) and BRVO (p = 0.003). First recurrence after the first dexamethasone implant injection occurred after 3.8 months (mean) in CRVO and 3.5 months in BRVO patients (group 1), versus 3.2 and 3.7 months, respectively, in group 2. In group 1, 63.6% with CRVO and 50% with BRVO showed an increased intraocular pressure after treatment; in group 2, 57.1% with CRVO and 50.0% with BRVO, respectively.


CONCLUSIONS
In CRVO, there was no difference between the two treatment strategies investigated. However, in BRVO, dexamethasone implant monotherapy was associated with better functional outcome.
Department of Ophthalmology, Ludwig Maximilians University Munich, Mathildenstrasse 8, Munich, Germany. wolfgang.j.mayer @ med.uni-muenchen.de
Wolfgang J
WJ
Mayer
Matthias
M
Remy
Armin
A
Wolf
Daniel
D
Kook
Anselm
A
Kampik
Michael
M
Ulbig
Lukas
L
Reznicek
Christos
C
Haritoglou
D000368:Aged; D020533:Angiogenesis Inhibitors / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000009:adverse effects; D061067:Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000009:adverse effects; D000068258:Bevacizumab; D003907:Dexamethasone / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000009:adverse effects; D004343:Drug Implants; D004359:Drug Therapy, Combination; D005260:Female; D005938:Glucocorticoids / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000009:adverse effects; D006801:Humans; D058449:Intravitreal Injections; D008269:Macular Edema / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000503:physiopathology; D008297:Male; D011446:Prospective Studies; D012170:Retinal Vein Occlusion / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000503:physiopathology; D041623:Tomography, Optical Coherence; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D042461:Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A / Q000037:antagonists & inhibitors; D014792:Visual Acuity / Q000502:physiology
D020533:Angiogenesis Inhibitors; D061067:Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; D004343:Drug Implants; D005938:Glucocorticoids; C467484:VEGFA protein, human; D042461:Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A; D000068258:Bevacizumab; D003907:Dexamethasone