Gamze KARATAŞ MADEN, Burak ERDEN, Akin CAKİR, Selim BÖLÜKBASİ, Serkan ERDENOZ, Bora Deniz ARGON, Mustafa ELCİOĞLU

Intravitreal Ranibizumab Versus Intravitreal Ranibizumab Combined with Posterior Subtenon Triamcinolone Acetonide in Diabetic Macular Edema

Objectives: This is a retrospective, comparative evaluation of the short-term efficacy and safety of intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) and IVR combined with posterior subtenon triamcinolone acetonide (STA) in the treatment of diabetic macular oedema (DME). Methods: A total of 79 pseudophakic eyes of 57 patients with DME who underwent IVR injection treatment were examined retrospectively. All of the patients were treatment-naive. In the study group (STA+IVR), consisting of 30 eyes of 39 patients, the STA and IVR were administered in the first treatment session simultaneously, followed by 2 consecutive monthly IVR injections. In the control group (IVR only) comprised 40 eyes of 27 patients, 3 consecutive monthly IVR injections were administered. Patients with serous retinal detachment (SRD) according to optical coherence tomography images were identified in both groups for subgroup analyses. The primary outcome measures were changes in central macular thickness (CMT), best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and the intraocular pressure (IOP) at 1, 2, and 3 months post-injection. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the demographic characteristics of the patients’ baseline BCVA and CMT measurements (p>0.05). For the IVR group, the mean pre-treatment CMT and BCVA was 421.20±89.10 µm and 0.42±0.24 logMAR, respectively. After the third injection, the mean was 308.12±59.07 µm and 0.20±0.12 logMAR, respectively. The combined treatment group baseline measurements were 454.50±122.52 µm and 0.54±0.29 logMAR, respectively. After the third injection, the mean was 294.22±50.33 µm and 0.27±0.21 logMAR, respectively. The decrease was statistically significant for both groups (p=0.001). Comparison of the CMT within groups revealed a statistically significant difference in favor of the combined group after the second injection (p=0.017). There was no statistically significant difference in the BCVA gains between groups (p>0.05). Patients with SRD were evaluated as a subgroup, and at the first month, the mean gain in CMT was -71.63±57.98 µm in the control group and -123.61±93.46 µm in the study group (p=0.048). The required anti-glaucomatous treatment was statistically significant in the combined group (p=0.008). Conclusion: Both treatments provided improvement in BCVA and CMT and can be considered functional and anatomically effective treatment options for DME.

Tam Metin

Kaynakça

1. Kalantzis G, Angelou M, Poulokau E. Diabetic retinopathy: An historical assessment. Hormones 2006;5:72–5.

2. Scholl S, Augustin A, Loewenstein A, Rizzo S, Kupperman B. General pathophysiology of macular edema. Eur J Ophthalmol 2011;21 Suppl 6:S10–9.

3. Ciulla TA, Pollack JS, Williams DF. Visual acuity outcomes and anti-VEGF therapy intensity in diabetic macular oedema: a real-world analysis of 28 658 patient eyes. Br J Ophthalmol 2021;105:216–21.

4. Glassman AR, Baker CW, Beaulieu WT, Bressler NM, Punjabi OS, Stockdale CR, et al; DRCR Retina Network. Assessment of the DRCR retina network approach to management with initial observation for eyes with center-involved diabetic macular edema and good visual acuity: a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Ophthalmol 2020;138:341–9.

5. Ozsaygili C, Duru N. Comparison of intravitreal dexamethasone implant and aflibercept in patients with treatment-naive diabetic macular edema with serous retinal detachment. Retina 2020;40:1044–52.

6. Bolukbasi S, Cakir A, Erden B, Karaca G. Comparison of the short-term effect of aflibercept and dexamethasone implant on serous retinal detachment in the treatment of naive diabetic macular edema. Cutan Ocul Toxicol 2019;38:401–5.

7. Luo D, Zhu B, Zheng Z, Zhou H, Sun X, Xu X. Subtenon vs intravitreal triamcinolone injection in diabetic macular edema, a prospective study in Chinese population. Pak J Med Sci 2014;30:749–54.

8. Kurt MM, Çekiç O, Akpolat Ç, Aslankurt M, Elçioğlu M. Vessel diameter study: intravitreal vs posterior subtenon triamcinolone acetonide injection for diabetic macular edema. Eye (Lond). 2017;31:1155–62.

9. Ozdek S, Bahçeci UA, Gürelik G, Hasanreisoğlu B. Posterior subtenon and intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide for diabetic macular edema. J Diabetes Complications 2006;20:246–51.

10. Wang YS, Li X, Wang HY, Zhang ZF, Li MH, Su XN. Intravitreal bevacizumab combined with/without triamcinolone acetonide in single injection for treatment of diabetic macular edema. Chin Med J (Engl) 2011;124:352–8.

11. Eriş E, Perente I, Vural E, Vural A, Seymen Z, Celebi ARC, et al. Evaluation of the effect of combined intravitreal ranibizumab injection and sub-tenon steroid injection in the treatment of resistant diabetic macular edema. Int Ophthalmol 2019;39:1575– 80.

12. Maturi RK, Glassman AR, Liu D, Beck RW, Bhavsar AR, Bressler NM, et al; Diabetic retinopathy clinical research network. effect of adding dexamethasone to continued ranibizumab treatment in patients with persistent diabetic macular edema: a DRCR network phase 2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Ophthalmol 2018;136:29–38.

13. Kim M, Kim Y, Lee SJ. Comparison of aqueous concentrations of angiogenic and inflammatory cytokines based on optical coherence tomography patterns of diabetic macular edema. Indian J Ophthalmol 2015;63:312–7.

14. Ercalik NY, Yenerel NM, Imamoglu S, Kumral ET, Vural ET. Combined intravitreal ranibizumab and sub-tenon injection of triamcinolone for the treatment of diabetic macular edema with retinal detachment. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 2016;32:225– 9.

15. Yu SY, Nam DH, Lee DY. Changes in aqueous concentrations of various cytokines after intravitreal bevacizumab and subtenon triamcinolone injection for diabetic macular edema. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2018;256:39–47.

16. Özdemir H, Karacorlu M, Karacorlu S. Regression of serous macular detachment after intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide in patient with diabetic macular edema. Am J Ophthalmol 2005;140:251–5.

17. Iwao K, Inatani M, Kawaji T, Koga T, Mawatari Y, Tanihara H. Frequency and risk factors for intraocular pressure elevation after posterior sub-Tenon capsule triamcinolone acetonide injection. J Glaucoma 2007;16:251–6.

18. Yang YH, Kuo HH, Hsu WC, Hsieh YT. Ocular hypertension and severe intraocular pressure elevation after posterior subtenon injection of triamcinolone acetonide for various diseases. Int J Ophthalmol 2020;13:946–51.