Objective To observe and evaluate the safety and efficacy of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in the treatment of eyes with macular edema (ME) secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) in Lhasa, Tibet. MethodsA retrospective case series. From September 2018 to January 2022, a total of 41 patients (41 eyes) with BRVO-ME, who were diagnosed in Department of Ophthalmology of Tibet Autonomous Region People’s Hospital, were included in this study. There were 21 eyes in 21 males and 20 eyes in 20 females. The median age was 53 (31,75) years. There were 24 patients with hypertension (58.8%, 24/41). Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), ocular pressure, fundus color photography and optical coherence tomography (OCT) were performed in all eyes. The BCVA was performed using the international standard logarithmic visual acuity chart, which was converted into logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) BCVA for record. The foveal macular thickness (CMT) was measured by OCT. All eyes were treated with intravitreous injection of anti-VEGF drugs, once a month, among which 23 eyes (56.1%, 23/41) received intravitreous injection of ranibizumab (IVR), and 18 eyes (43.9%, 18/41) received intravitreous injection of conbercept (IVC), and were grouped accordingly. There was no significant difference in age (Z=－0.447), gender composition (Z=－0.485), logMAR BCVA (t=－1.591), intraocular pressure (t=－0.167) and CMT (t=－1.290) between two groups (P＞0.05). During the follow-up, the same devices and methods were used at baseline to perform relevant examinations, and the changes of BCVA, intraocular pressure, CMT and new cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events were compared between baseline and the last follow-up. logMAR BCVA, intraocular pressure and CMT were compared between baseline and last follow-up using Student t test. The comparison of injection times and follow-up time between IVR group and IVC group was conducted by Mann-Whitney U test. ResultsAt baseline, logMAR BCVA, intraocular pressure, and CMT were 0.852±0.431, (12.5±2.5) mm Hg (1 mm Hg= 0.133 kPa), and (578.1±191.1) μm, respectively. At the last follow-up, the number of anti-VEGF drug treatments was (2.7±1.2) times; logMAR BCVA and CMT were 0.488±0.366 and (207.4±108.7) μm, respectively, with CMT > 250 μm in 14 eyes (34.1%, 14/41). Compared with baseline, BCVA (t=4.129) and CMT (t=－0.713) were significantly improved, with statistical significance (P＜0.001). The injection times of IVR group and IVC group were (2.6±0.9) and (3.0±1.5) times, respectively. There were no significant differences in the number of injection times (t=－1.275), logMAR BCVA (t=－0.492), intraocular pressure (t=0.351) and CMT (t=－1.783) between the two groups (P＞0.05). No new hypertension, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events occurred in all patients during follow-up. At the last follow-up, there were no eye complications related to treatment modalities and drugs. ConclusionShort-term anti-VEGF treatment can improve the visual acuity of BRVO secondary ME patients and alleviate ME in Lhasa, Tibet. The safety and efficacy of ranibizumab and conbercept were similar.
ObjectiveTo compare and analyze the application of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) drugs for intravitreal injection in the real world before and after the establishment of one-stop intravitreal injection center, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of different management modes. MethodsA retrospective clinical study. A total of 4 015 patients (4 659 eyes) who received anti-VEGF drugs for ocular fundus diseases at the Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital from July, 2018 to June, 2022 were included in the study. There were 2 146 males and 1 869 females. The ocular fundus diseases in this study were as follows: 1 090 eyes of 968 patients with wet age-related macular degeneration (wAMD); 855 eyes of 654 patients with diabetic macular edema (DME); 1 158 eyes of 980 patients with diabetic retinopathy (DR); 930 eyes of 916 patients with macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO-ME). A total of 294 eyes of 275 patients with choroidal neovascularization secondary to pathological myopia (PM-CNV); 332 eyes of 222 patients with other fundus diseases. A total of 13 796 anti-VEGF needles were injected. A total of 1 252 patients (1 403 eyes) from July 2018 to June 2020 were regarded as the control group. From July 2020 to June 2022, 2 763 patients (3 256 eyes) who received anti-VEGF treatment in the intravitreal injection center were regarded as the observation group. The total number of intravitreal injection needles, the distribution of anti-VEGF therapy in each disease according to disease classification, the proportion of patients who chose the 3+ on-demand treatment (PRN) regimen and the distribution of clinical application of different anti-VEGF drugs were compared between the control group and the observation group. The waiting time and medical experience of patients were investigated by questionnaire. χ2 test was used to compare the count data between the two groups, and t test was used to compare the measurement data. ResultsAmong the 13 796 anti-VEGF injections in 4 659 eyes, the total number of anti-VEGF drugs used in the control and observation groups were 4 762 and 9 034, respectively, with an average of (3.39±3.78) and (2.78±2.27) injections per eye (t=6.900, P＜0.001), respectively. In the control and observation groups, a total of 1 728 and 2 705 injections of anti-VEGF drugs were used for wAMD with an average of (5.14±4.56) and (3.59±2.45) injections per eye, respectively; a total of 982 and 2 038 injections of anti-VEGF drugs were used for DME with an average of (4.36±4.91) and (3.24±2.77) needles per eye, respectively. Additionally, a total of 942 and 2 179 injections of anti-VEGF drugs were injected for RVO-ME with an average of (3.98±3.71) and (3.14±2.15) injections per eye, respectively; a total of 291 and 615 injections of anti-VEGF drugs were injected for PM-CNV with an average of (3.31±2.63) and (2.99±1.69) injections per eye, respectively. A total of 683 and 1 029 injections of anti-VEGF drugs were injected for DR with an average of (1.60±1.26) and (1.41±1.05) injections per eye, respectively. The clinical application and implementation of "3+PRN" treatment were as follows: 223 (66.4%, 223/336) and 431 eyes (57.2%, 431/754) in the wAMD (χ2=8.210, P=0.004), 75 (33.3%, 75/225) and 236 (37.5%, 236/630) eyes in the DME (χ2=1.220, P＞0.05), and 97 (40.9%, 97/237) and 355 eyes (51.2%, 355/693) in the RVO-ME (χ2=7.498, P=0.006), 39 (44.3%, 39/88) and 111 eyes (53.9%, 111/206) in the PM-CNV ( χ2=2.258, P＞0.05), respectively. In addition, the results of the questionnaire survey showed that there were significant differences between the control and observation groups regarding the time of appointment waiting for surgery (t=1.340), time from admission to entering the operating room on the day of injection (t=2.780), time from completing preoperative treatment preparation to waiting for entering the operating room (t=8.390), and time from admission to discharge (t=6.060) (P＜0.05). ConclusionsThe establishment of a one-stop intravitreal injection mode greatly improved work efficiency and increased the number of injections. At the same time, the compliance, waiting time, and overall medical experience of patients significantly improved under centralized management.
Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is a multifunctional factor that promotes blood vessel formation and increases vascular permeability. Its abnormal elevation plays a key role in common retinal diseases such as wet age-related macular degeneration and diabetic macular edema. Anti-VEGF therapy can inhibit angiogenesis, reduce vascular leakage and edema, thereby delaying disease progression and stabilizing or improving vision. Currently, the clinical application of anti-VEGF drugs has achieved satisfactory therapeutic effects, but there are also issues such as high injection frequency, heavy economy burden, potential systemic side effects, and non-responsiveness. To address these issues, current research and development mainly aim on biosimilars, multi-target drugs, drug delivery systems, oral anti-VEGF drugs, and gene therapy. Some drugs have shown great potential and are expected to turn over a new leaf for anti-VEGF treatment in ophthalmology.
Retinal vein occlusion (RVO) is a closely related disease of ophthalmology and systemic diseases. The Expert consensus on clinical diagnosis and treatment path of retinal vein occlusion in China (consensus) emphasizes that etiological diagnosis and treatment should be paid primary attention to, and etiological exploration should be placed in an important position in the diagnosis and treatment path. In addition to etiological treatment, the consensus emphasizes that clinical attention should be paid to the management of anterior segment neovascularization, neovascular glaucoma and macular edema. Especially for patients with short course of central retinal vein occlusion, the occurrence of 100-day glaucoma should be vigilant, and active anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) drugs, laser photocoagulation and intraocular pressure treatment should be taken. For the treatment of macular edema, the consensus points out that anti-VEGF drugs and intraocular glucocorticoid sustained-release agents are effective, but the latter should be used cautiously to avoid problems such as high intraocular pressure glaucoma and accelerated cataract formation. For deficient RVO, the consensus defines its concept, defines the time point of treatment when combined with macular edema, and clarifies the applicable conditions of laser therapy.
ObjectiveTo observe the clinical features of high myopia domed-shaped macula (DSM) complicated with choroidal neovascularization (CNV) and the efficacy of intravitreal injection of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). MethodsA retrospective clinical study. A total of 23 eyes of 23 patients with high myopia DSM combined with CNV diagnosed by ophthalmology examination in Department of Ophthalmology of The Second People's Hospital of Foshan from January 2019 to December 2023 were included in the study.Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure, optical coherence tomography (OCT) were performed in all eyes. BCVA tests are performed using the international standard visual acuity chart, which was statistically converted to logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) visual acuity. DSM height, central macular thickness (CMT) and choroidal thickness (ChT) were measured by OCT. According to OCT image features, DSM was divided into horizontal and vertical elliptic bulges and circular bulges. According to the literature standard, CNV was divided into subfoveal CNV and parafoveal CNV. All patients were treated with 0.05 ml intravitreal injection of ranibizumab or conbercept (IVR or IVC). The treatment regimen was 1+ on-demand treatment. The first IVR and IVC treatment were performed on 17 eyes and 6 eyes, respectively, and were divided into IVR group and IVC group. Follow-up time ≥1 month after treatment. The clinical features of the patients and the changes of BCVA, intraocular pressure, CMT and ChT after treatment were observed. Independent sample t test was used for comparison between groups. ResultsThere were 23 eyes in 23 cases, 7 males had 7 eyes and 16 females had 16 eyes. There were 11 and 12 eyes in the right and left eyes respectively. Age were (49±16) years old; logMAR BCVA was 0.94±0.39. Shapes of DSM were in 13 (56.52%, 13/23), 6 (26.09%, 6/23), and 4 (17.39%, 4/23) eyes, respectively. The dome height was (97.83±46.14) μm. CMT and ChT were (276.39±98.35) and (49.48±31.66) μm, respectively. There were 17 eyes in the IVR group, including 4 males and 13 females. There were 6 cases in the IVC group, 3 cases were male and 3 cases were female. At the last follow-up, logMAR BCVA and CMT were 0.60±0.39 and (209.96±71.38) μm, respectively. BCVA was significantly increased and CMT was significantly decreased compared with before treatment, with statistical significance (t=2.98, 2.62; P=0.005, 0.010). One month after treatment and at the last follow-up, there were no significant differences in the degree of BCVA improvement (t=1.47, 1.35), intraocular pressure change (t=−0.20, −0.56) and ChT reduction thickness (t=0.80, −0.62) between IVR group and IVC group (P＞0.05). At 1 month after treatment and last follow-up, the CMT of patients in IVR group and IVC group was decreased by (57.94±67.61), (83.17±78.37) μm and (13.33±9.73), (18.17±17.88) μm compared with that before treatment, respectively, and the differences were statistically significant (t=2.64, 3.21; P＜0.05). ConclusionsIVR or IVC in the treatment of high myopia DSM combined with CNV can effectively improve BCVA. The reduction of CMT with ranibizumab is better than conbercept.
Diabetic retinopathy (DR) has become an important cause of irreversible vision loss worldwide. Intravitreal injection of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) drugs is an important adjunct to the treatment of DR. However, the current anti-VEGF treatment regimen is not uniform. Anti-vegf injection was preferred and then delayed combined with laser had better prognostic effect. The best time for operation was 5-7 days after injection of anti-VEGF. Pars plana vitrectomy (PPV), intraoperative and postoperative on-demand anti-VEGF injection can significantly improve patient prognosis and reduce complications, but further research is needed to strike a balance between the economic burden and the number of injections. Various anti-VEGF drugs have their own advantages for different diseases and should be selected according to the characteristics of the diseases and drugs. Anti-VEGF drugs combined with antioxidants may further improve DR Outcomes. Future studies should pay more attention to the optimization and personalization of anti-VEGF drug application programs to meet the therapeutic needs of different patients.