Clinical and electrophysiologic outcome in patients with neovascular glaucoma treated with and without bevacizumab
To investigate the clinical and electrophysiologic effect of a single intravitreal injection of bevacizumab for neovascular glaucoma (NVG) after ischemic central retinal vein occlusion (iCRVO).
Nineteen eyes from 19 patients with NVG secondary to iCRVO were randomly allocated to either an intravitreal bevacizumab injection and panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) (10 eyes) or PRP alone (9 eyes). The primary outcome measure was the change in the total retinal function 6 months after treatment, demonstrated by full-field electroretinography (ERG). Secondary outcomes included visual acuity, intraocular pressure (IOP), glaucoma medication, additional IOP-lowering treatment, and the presence of ocular neovascularization before treatment, and 1 week, 2 months, and 6 months after treatment.
The regression of ocular neovascularization in the bevacizumab/PRP group was confirmed 1 week after injection. Patients in both study groups had very poor visual acuity at baseline. This remained unchanged. There was no significant difference in the mean IOP between the groups at any point in time. The a-wave amplitudes of combined rod-cone response were significantly decreased after 6 months in the bevacizumab/PRP group (p=0.028), compared with the baseline values. The a- and b-wave amplitudes of combined rod-cone response and the b-wave amplitudes of the 30-Hz flicker response were also markedly reduced compared with the PRP group (-60%, -43%, -47% vs +23%, -36%, -16%, respectively).
This study suggests that intravitreal injection of bevacizumab is valuable in the treatment of NVG by hastening the resolution of neovascularization, while the full-field ERG results indicate that bevacizumab may reduce the photoreceptor function in NVG patients.
Available from: Yin-Shan Ng
- "At a minimum, our findings suggest that risks to patients with glaucoma may need to be more systematically and rigorously assessed. Based on full-field electroretinographic results, it was recently reported that VEGF neutralization with bevacizumab regressed neovascularization and also reduced photoreceptor function in patients with neovascular glaucoma.49 Furthermore, a study observing 49 patients with age-related macular degeneration found that, in eyes treated with ranibizumab, nerve fiber layer thickness was significantly reduced after 1 year of treatment, whereas untreated control eyes displayed no change.50 "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A) is a validated therapeutic target in several angiogenic- and vascular permeability-related pathological conditions, including certain cancers and potentially blinding diseases, such as age-related macular degeneration and diabetic retinopathy. We and others have shown that VEGF-A also plays an important role in neuronal development and neuroprotection, including in the neural retina. Antagonism of VEGF-A function might, therefore, present a risk to neuronal survival as a significant adverse effect. Herein, we demonstrate that VEGF-A acts directly on retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) to promote survival. VEGF receptor-2 signaling via the phosphoinositide-3-kinase/Akt pathway was required for the survival response in isolated RGCs. These results were confirmed in animal models of staurosporine-induced RGC death and experimental hypertensive glaucoma. More important, we observed that VEGF-A blockade significantly exacerbated neuronal cell death in the hypertensive glaucoma model. Our findings highlight the need to better define the risks associated with use of VEGF-A antagonists in the ocular setting.
American Journal Of Pathology 02/2013; 182(4). DOI:10.1016/j.ajpath.2012.12.032 · 4.59 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The use of antivascular endothelial growth factors such as bevacizumab and ranibizumab has brought about a revolution in management protocols of various ophthalmic disorders. A lot has been written about these agents, still lacunae exist in our understanding due to paucity of randomized control trials with large number of patients. This brief review attempts to throw light on the clinical applications of these molecules for glaucoma.
05/2012; 6(2):75-78. DOI:10.5005/jp-journals-10008-1110
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
To determine the incidence rate as well as causative diagnoses and surgical indications of enucleation in Iceland during the years 1992-2004.
A retrospective population-based incidence study involving the entire population of Iceland. Medical records of all patients who underwent enucleation in Iceland from January 1992 through December 2004 were reviewed. The annually updated Icelandic census was used as a denominator data.
Fifty-six eyes were enucleated during 1992-2004. No eviscerations were done, and the three exenterations performed were not included in the study. The mean annual age-adjusted incidence rate of enucleation in Iceland was 1.48 enucleations per 100 000 population in comparison with 2.66 enucleations per 100 000 for the time period 1964-1991. With advancing age, a significant increasing linear trend existed (p < 0.001). The median age at enucleation was 51 years (SD 22; mean 55 years; 16-91 years). The three most common surgical indications for enucleation were blind painful eye, suspected ocular malignancy and acute trauma. The most common causative diagnosis for enucleation was traumatic lesion (39%). The annual incidence was 2.00 enucleations per 100 000 for men and 0.95 for women. There were significantly more men in the traumatic lesion group (p < 0.001), but no gender predominance was found in the other groups of causative diagnoses (p = 0.8).
The overall mean annual incidence of enucleation in Iceland is continually decreasing, although the incidence of severe ocular trauma and ocular malignancy is fairly stable.
Acta ophthalmologica 11/2012; 92(2). DOI:10.1111/aos.12004 · 2.84 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.