Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for macular oedema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion

Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, .
Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) (Impact Factor: 6.03). 02/2013; 1(1):CD009510. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009510.pub2
Source: PubMed


Branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) is one of the most common occurring retinal vascular abnormalities. The pathogenesis of BRVO is thought to involve both retinal vein compression and damage to the vessel wall, possibly leading to thrombus formation at sites where retinal arterioles cross retinal veins. The most common cause of visual loss in patients with BRVO is macular oedema (MO). Grid or focal laser photocoagulation has been shown to reduce the risk of visual loss and improve visual acuity (VA) in up to two thirds of individuals with MO secondary to BRVO, however, limitations to this treatment exist and newer modalities have suggested equal or improved efficacy. Recently, antiangiogenic therapy with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) has been used successfully to treat MO resulting from a variety of causes. As elevated intraocular levels of VEGF have been demonstrated in patients with retinal vein occlusions there is a strong basis for the hypothesis that anti-VEGF agents may be beneficial in the treatment of vascular leakage and MO. To investigate the efficacy and safety of intravitreal anti-VEGF agents for preserving or improving vision in the treatment of MO secondary to BRVO. We searched CENTRAL of any prior treatment.

13 Reads
  • Source
    • "Procedures for slowing vision deterioration include laser therapy for RVO, retrobulbar or intraocular injection of triamcinolone for macular edema, vitrectomy for vitreous hemorrhage, and drainage valve implantation for glaucoma. New anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents have been tested for treatment of malformed vessels or macular edema complicated with RVO [24,48-50]. However, the association of RRH with other congenital vascular malformations, such as Sturge–Weber syndrome and macroaneurysm, continues to make it a challenging condition for doctors. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Backgroud Retinal racemose hemangioma (RRH) is a rare congenital disorder that often co-occurs with other ocular complications. In this study, we present a case of RRH complicated with retinal vein obstruction in three branches and provide a review of ocular complications and associations with RRH. Case presentation One case of RRH is presented. Fundus examination, fluorescein angiography (FFA) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) of the patient identified Group 3 RRH complicated with retinal vein occlusions in the superotemporal, inferotemporal, and inferonasal branches. Macular edema, which causes visual impairment, was detected. A brief literature review was also presented. The PubMed database was searched for RRH or related keywords to find reports of ocular complications or associations published on or before Dec. 31, 2013. A total of 140 papers describing167 RRH cases were found. The mean age of diagnosis was 22.97 years. Ocular complications were mentioned in 32 (19.16%) cases. Retinal vein occlusion (46.88%) was the major ocular complication in RRH, followed by hemorrhage (34.38%). Eight (4.79%) cases were associated with other ocular diseases such as Sturge–Weber syndrome , Morning glory disc anomaly and macroaneurysm. Conclusions Although RRH is a relatively non-progressive condition, its complications may lead to vision loss and should be treated in time.
    BMC Ophthalmology 08/2014; 14(1):101. DOI:10.1186/1471-2415-14-101 · 1.02 Impact Factor
  • Source
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Intravitreal agents have replaced observation in macular edema in central (CRVO) and grid laser photocoagulation in branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO). We conducted a systematic review to evaluate efficacy and safety outcomes of intravitreal therapies for macular edema in CRVO and BRVO. And Findings: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for RCTs with no limitations of language and year of publication. 11 RCTs investigating anti-VEGF agents (ranibizumab, bevacizumab, aflibercept) and steroids (triamcinolone, dexamethasone implant) with a minimum follow-up of 1 year were evaluated. Greatest gain in visual acuity after 12 months was observed both under aflibercept 2 mg: +16.2 letters (8.5 injections), and under bevacizumab 1.25 mg: +16.1 letters (8 injections). Ranibizumab 0.5 mg improved vision by +13.9 letters (8.8 injections). Triamcinolone 1 mg and 4 mg stabilized visual acuity at a lower injection frequency (-1.2 letters, 2 injections). Ranibizumab 0.5 mg resulted in a visual acuity gain of +18.3 letters (8.4 injections). The effect of dexamethasone implant was transient after 1.9 implants in both indications. Serious ocular adverse events were rare, e.g., endophthalmitis occurred in 0.0-0.9%. Major differences were found in an indirect comparison between steroids and anti-VEGF agents for cataract progression (19.8-35.0% vs. 0.9-7.0%) and in required treatment of increased intraocular pressure (7.0-41.0% vs. none). No major differences were identified in systemic adverse events. Anti-VEGF agents result in a promising gain of visual acuity, but require a high injection frequency. Dexamethasone implant might be an alternative, but comparison is impaired as the effect is temporary and it has not yet been tested in PRN regimen. The ocular risk profile seems to be favorable for anti-VEGF agents in comparison to steroids. Because comparative data from head-to-head trials are missing currently, clinicians and patients should carefully weigh the benefit-harm ratio.
    PLoS ONE 10/2013; 8(10):e78538. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0078538 · 3.23 Impact Factor
Show more