Comparative Study
Journal Article
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide versus bevacizumab therapy for macular edema associated with branch retinal vein occlusion.

PURPOSE: To compare visual outcomes after intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) injection and intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) administration for treatment of macular edema associated with branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO).

METHODS: A retrospective comparative case series of 134 consecutive patients that were treated with either IVTA or IVB for macular edema caused by BRVO. Visual acuity at baseline and 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, and central macular thickness measured by OCT at baseline and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. The time to recurrence of macular edema after treatment was also analyzed.

RESULTS: Visual acuity (Snellen equivalent) improved significantly from 0.87 logMAR (0.14) to 0.49 logMAR (0.33) in the IVTA group, and from 0.91 logMAR (0.13) to 0.45 logMAR (0.36) in the IVB group 12 months after injection (p < 0.001). Central macular thickness decreased significantly from 491.0 microm to 255.8 microm in the IVTA group, and from 477.4 microm to 218.9 microm in the IVB group 12 months after injection (p < 0.001). In between-group comparisons, neither visual acuity (p = 0.892) nor macular thickness (p = 0.612) improvements were statistically significantly different. In the IVTA-all group, recurrence of macular edema occurred in 7.6% of patients at a mean of 12.6 months postoperatively, and the average number of injections was 1.08. In the IVB-all group, 26.0% of patients suffered recurrences at a mean of 5.3 months after treatment, and received a mean of 1.89 injections. Recurrence was more frequent in the IVB group compared to the IVTA group (Kaplan-Meier survival analysis log-rank test, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS: IVTA and IVB injections were similarly effective for improving visual acuity in patients with macular edema secondary to BRVO. However, the IVTA group showed longer mean improvement duration and less disease recurrence, and required fewer injections than the IVB group.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app