Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Treatment for Macular Edema in Eyes with Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion with Vs Without Glaucoma - Does Glaucoma Affect Visual Outcome in Eyes with BRVO-ME After AntiVEGF Injections?

Overview

Journal Clin Ophthalmol

Publisher Dove Medical Press

Specialty Ophthalmology

Date 2022 Jul 25

PMID 35872969

Authors

Shin Asami

Masahiko Sugimoto

Hideyuki Tsukitome

Kumiko Kato

Hisashi Matsubara

Mineo Kondo

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the therapeutic effects of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents in eyes with macular edema associated with branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO-ME) with glaucoma to those without glaucoma.

Patients And Methods: This retrospective study was conducted using the medical records of Mie University Hospital from 2013 to 2017. Patients were recruited if they had received anti-VEGF agents for BRVO-ME treatment and included 30 patients (30 eyes) without glaucoma (G[-] group) and 27 patients (27 eyes) with glaucoma (G[+] group). The central retinal thickness (CRT) and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 3 months after a single injection of anti-VEGF agents were compared between the two groups.

Results: Before treatment, the mean±standard deviation of the CRT was 514.2±117.3 μm for the G[-] group, which was not significantly different from that for the G[+] group (533.4±171.4 μm). The CRT in the G[-] and G[+] groups significantly reduced to 321.1±114.6 μm and 347.8±134.7 μm, respectively, at 1 month after the injection and to 360.4±159.5 μm and 352.4±151.9 μm, respectively, at 3 months after the injection (<0.01 for each group). The difference in the degree of CRT reduction between the two groups was not significant. Before treatment, the BCVA was 0.42±0.32 logMAR units in the G[-] group and 0.57±0.33 logMAR units in the G[+] group, showing no significant difference. The BCVA in the G[-] and G[+] groups improved significantly to 0.27±0.26 logMAR units and 0.34±0.42 logMAR units, respectively, at 1 month, and to 0.18±0.20 logMAR units and 0.39±0.34 logMAR units, respectively, at 3 months (<0.01). The BCVA in the G[-] group was significantly better than that in the G[+] group at 3 months (=0.02).

Conclusion: The therapeutic response of anti-VEGF agents for BRVO-ME is affected by the presence of glaucoma.

References

Kida T, Flammer J, Oku H, Morishita S, Fukumoto M, Suzuki H . Suppressed endothelin-1 by anti-VEGF therapy is important for patients with BRVO-related macular edema to improve their vision. EPMA J. 2016; 7(1):18. PMC: 4995759. DOI: 10.1186/s13167-016-0066-2. View

Ito Y, Saishin Y, Sawada O, Kakinoki M, Miyake T, Sawada T . Comparison of single injection and three monthly injections of intravitreal bevacizumab for macular edema associated with branch retinal vein occlusion. Clin Ophthalmol. 2015; 9:175-80. PMC: 4315537. DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S76261. View

Browning D, Glassman A, Aiello L, Beck R, Brown D, Fong D . Relationship between optical coherence tomography-measured central retinal thickness and visual acuity in diabetic macular edema. Ophthalmology. 2006; 114(3):525-36. PMC: 2585542. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.06.052. View

Loesch A . Perivascular nerves and vascular endothelium: recent advances. Histol Histopathol. 2002; 17(2):591-7. DOI: 10.14670/HH-17.591. View

Wang Q, Chan S, Yan Y, Yang J, Zhou W, Jonas J . Optical coherence tomography angiography in retinal vein occlusions. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2018; 256(9):1615-1622. DOI: 10.1007/s00417-018-4038-1. View

Sung K, Cho J, Lee S, Yun S, Choi J, Na J . Characteristics of visual field progression in medically treated normal-tension glaucoma patients with unstable ocular perfusion pressure. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010; 52(2):737-43. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.10-5351. View

Beato J, Pedrosa A, Pinheiro-Costa J, Freitas-da-Costa P, Falcao M, Melo A . Long-Term Effect of Anti-VEGF Agents on Intraocular Pressure in Age-Related Macular Degeneration. Ophthalmic Res. 2016; 56(1):30-4. DOI: 10.1159/000444395. View

Son Y, Lee S, Park J . Measurement of lamina and prelaminar thicknesses of both eyes in patients with unilateral branch retinal vein occlusion. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2016; 255(3):503-508. DOI: 10.1007/s00417-016-3491-y. View

Rogers S, McIntosh R, Cheung N, Lim L, Wang J, Mitchell P . The prevalence of retinal vein occlusion: pooled data from population studies from the United States, Europe, Asia, and Australia. Ophthalmology. 2009; 117(2):313-9.e1. PMC: 2945292. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.07.017. View

10.

Hykin P, Prevost A, Vasconcelos J, Murphy C, Kelly J, Ramu J . Clinical Effectiveness of Intravitreal Therapy With Ranibizumab vs Aflibercept vs Bevacizumab for Macular Edema Secondary to Central Retinal Vein Occlusion: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2019; 137(11):1256-1264. PMC: 6865295. DOI: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2019.3305. View

11.

Campochiaro P, Heier J, Feiner L, Gray S, Saroj N, Rundle A . Ranibizumab for macular edema following branch retinal vein occlusion: six-month primary end point results of a phase III study. Ophthalmology. 2010; 117(6):1102-1112.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.02.021. View

12.

Hayreh S . Prevalent misconceptions about acute retinal vascular occlusive disorders. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2005; 24(4):493-519. DOI: 10.1016/j.preteyeres.2004.12.001. View

13.

Hollo G, Aung T, Cantor L, Aihara M . Cystoid macular edema related to cataract surgery and topical prostaglandin analogs: Mechanism, diagnosis, and management. Surv Ophthalmol. 2020; 65(5):496-512. DOI: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2020.02.004. View

14.

Ho J, Liou S, Lin H . Retinal vein occlusion and the risk of stroke development: a five-year follow-up study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2008; 147(2):283-290.e2. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2008.08.006. View

15.

de Vries V, Bassil F, Ramdas W . The effects of intravitreal injections on intraocular pressure and retinal nerve fiber layer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 2020; 10(1):13248. PMC: 7411061. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-70269-7. View

16.

Chen X, Hu T, Zuo J, Wu H, Liu Z, Zhan Y . Intravitreal conbercept for branch retinal vein occlusion induced macular edema: one initial injection versus three monthly injections. BMC Ophthalmol. 2020; 20(1):225. PMC: 7291449. DOI: 10.1186/s12886-020-01494-x. View

17.

Venkatesh R, Pereira A, Sangai S, Thomas S, Yadav N . Prognostic Value of Hyperreflective Material on Visual Acuity in Treatment-Naïve BRVO. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2020; 51(6):320-327. DOI: 10.3928/23258160-20200603-02. View

18.

Dichtl A, Jonas J, Naumann G . Retinal nerve fiber layer thickness in human eyes. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1999; 237(6):474-9. DOI: 10.1007/s004170050264. View

19.

Park H, Jeon S, Lee M, Park C . Glaucoma Progression in the Unaffected Fellow Eye of Glaucoma Patients Who Developed Unilateral Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion. Am J Ophthalmol. 2016; 175:194-200. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2016.10.009. View

20.

Feist R, Ticho B, Shapiro M, Farber M . Branch retinal vein occlusion and quadratic variation in arteriovenous crossings. Am J Ophthalmol. 1992; 113(6):664-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9394(14)74791-9. View