Intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide vs bevacizumab for treatment of macular oedema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion.

PURPOSE: To compare the short-term visual and morphological results of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide vsintravitreal bevacizumab for eyes with macular oedema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO).

DESIGN: Retrospective interventional consecutive case series.

METHODS: We reviewed the clinical records of 29 patients (29 eyes) who had macular oedema due to BRVO with minimum follow-up of 6 months. A total of 16 patients were treated with intravitreal injection of 4 mg/0.1ml triamcinolone acetonide. The other 13 patients received intravitreal bevacizumab of 1.25 mg in 0.05 ml. Baseline visual acuity, macular thickness, and intraocular pressure were recorded. Final visual acuity, final macular thickness, intraocular pressure, and adverse events were also recorded throughout the follow-up.

RESULTS: All patients completed at least 6 months of follow-up. There were significant improvement in visual acuity and showed significant macular oedema decrease in optical coherence tomography examination in both the two groups postoperatively. However the therapeutic effects showed no statistically significant difference between these two groups with regard to visual results (F=6.012, P=0.083) and macular thickness decline (F=0.007, P=0.570). Seven eyes developed recurrent macular oedema and received reinjections of triamcinolone acetonide or bevacizumab.

CONCLUSION: These short-term results indicate that intravitreal injection of triamcinolone acetonide or bevacizumab can both improve visual acuity and decrease macular oedema temporarily in eyes with BRVO. However, the therapeutic effects of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide showed no significant differences compared with intravitreal bevacizumab with regard to anatomical and functional outcomes but seemed to cause more adverse events than bevacizumab.