Journal List > J Korean Ophthalmol Soc > v.53(10) > 1009197

TOOLS
Lee, Byon, Lee, and Oum: Combined Therapy of Bevacizumab and Grid Photocoagulation for Macular Edema in Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion
Original Article
Journal of the Korean Ophthalmological Society

Journal of the Korean Ophthalmological Society 2012; 53(10): 1458-1464.

Published online: 17 October 2012

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3341/jkos.2012.53.10.1458

Combined Therapy of Bevacizumab and Grid Photocoagulation for Macular Edema in Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion

Seung Min Lee, MD, Ik Soo Byon, MD, Ji Eun Lee, MD, PhD, Boo Sub Oum, MD, PhD

Department of Ophthalmology, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Busan, Korea.

Address reprint requests to Ji Eun Lee, MD, PhD. Department of Ophthalmology, Pusan National University Hospital, #179 Gudeok-ro, Seo-gu, Busan 602-739, Korea. Tel: 82-51-240-7957, Fax: 82-51-242-7341, jlee@pusan.ac.kr

Received 7 January 2012       Accepted 12 August 2012

Copyright © 2012 The Korean Ophthalmological Society

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate clinical outcomes of a combined therapy of intravitreal bevacizumab and grid laser photocoagulation for macular edema in branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO).

Methods

In the present retrospective study, medical records of patients who were treated with intravitreal bevacizumab injection for macular edema due to BRVO were reviewed. The eyes were divided into 2 groups, the combined therapy group of intravitreal bevacizumab and grid laser photocoagulation, and the monotherapy group of intravitreal bevacizumab. Visual acuity and central subfield macular thickness were investigated at 1, 2 and 6 months. Recurrence rate was compared between the 2 groups.

Results

Among 49 eyes, 18 eyes underwent macular grid photocoagulation and 31 eyes did not receive laser treatment. Laser photocoagulation was performed at 1.2 months after injection on average. Visual acuity improved significantly at 2 and 6 months in the combined therapy group, and at 1, 2 and 6 months in the monotherapy group. Macular thickness decreased significantly compared to baseline at all visits in both groups. There was no significant difference in visual acuity and foveal thickness between the 2 groups. Recurrence at 6 months was significantly less frequent in the combined therapy group (3 eyes, 17%) then in the monotherapy group (14 eyes, 45%, p = 0.046).

Conclusions

Combined grid photocoagulation after intravitreal bevacizumab injection lowered the recurrence rate of macular edema complicated with BRVO.

Keywords: BRVO, Combination therapy, Intravitreal bevacizumab injection, Macular edema

Figures and Tables

Figure 1
Visual acuity (mean ± SD, log MAR) in the monotherapy group of intravitreal bevacizumab and the combined therapy group with grid laser photocoagulation for macular edema associated with branch retinal vein occlusion.
jkos-53-1458-g001
Figure 2
Central subfield macular thickness (mean ± SD, µm) in optical coherence tomography after intravitreal bevacizumab monotherapy and combined therapy with grid laser photocoagulation for macular edema associated with branch retinal vein occlusion.
jkos-53-1458-g002
Table 1
Baseline comparison of monotherapy of intravitreal bevacizumab and combined therapy with grid laser photocoagulation for macular edema in branch retinal vein occlusion in the retinal bleeding, the location of occlusion, the degree of ischemia, and the ischemic involvement of the fovea
jkos-53-1458-i001

Values are presented as number (%).

DD = disc diameter.

Table 2
Clinical outcomes after monotherapy of intravitreal bevacizumab and combined therapy with grid laser photocoagulation for macular edema in branch retinal vein occlusion
jkos-53-1458-i002

Values are presented as mean ± SD or number (%).

*VA = best corrected visual acuity; †Wilcoxon's signed rank test; ‡Fisher's exact test.

References

1. Klein R, Klein BE, Moss SE, Meuer SM. The epidemiology of retinal vein occlusion: the Beaver Dam Eye Study. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2000. 98:133–141.
2. Mitchell P, Smith W, Chang A. Prevalence and associations of retinal vein occlusion in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye Study. Arch Ophthalmol. 1996. 114:1243–1247.
3. Klein R, Moss SE, Meuer SM, Klein BE. The 15-year cumulative incidence of retinal vein occlusion: the Beaver Dam Eye Study. Arch Ophthalmol. 2008. 126:513–518.
4. Rehak J, Rehak M. Branch retinal vein occlusion: pathogenesis, visual prognosis, and treatment modalities. Curr Eye Res. 2008. 33:111–131.
5. Wong TY, Scott IU. Clinical practice. Retinal-vein occlusion. N Engl J Med. 2010. 363:2135–2144.
6. Noma H, Minamoto A, Funatsu H, et al. Intravitreal levels of vascular endothelial growth factor and interleukin-6 are correlated with macular edema in branch retinal vein occlusion. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2006. 244:309–315.
7. Silva RM, Faria de Abreu JR, Cunha-Vaz JG. Blood-retina barrier in acute retinal branch vein occlusion. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1995. 233:721–726.
8. Arnarsson A, Stefánsson E. Laser treatment and the mechanism of edema reduction in branch retinal vein occlusion. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000. 41:877–879.
9. The Branch Vein Occlusion Study Group. Argon laser photocoagulation for macular edema in branch vein occlusion. Am J Ophthalmol. 1984. 98:271–282.
10. Battaglia Parodi M, Saviano S, Ravalico G. Grid laser treatment in macular branch retinal vein occlusion. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1999. 237:1024–1027.
11. Riese J, Loukopoulos V, Meier C, et al. Combined intravitreal triamcinolone injection and laser photocoagulation in eyes with persistent macular edema after branch retinal vein occlusion. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2008. 246:1671–1676.
12. Scott IU, Ip MS, VanVeldhuisen PC, et al. The SCORE Study Research Group. A randomized trial comparing the efficacy and safety of intravitreal triamcinolone with standard care to treat vision loss associated with macular Edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion: the Standard Care vs Corticosteroid for Retinal Vein Occlusion (SCORE) study report 6. Arch Ophthalmol. 2009. 127:1115–1128.
13. Stahl A, Agostini H, Hansen LL, Feltgen N. Bevacizumab in retinal vein occlusion-results of a prospective case series. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2007. 245:1429–1436.
14. Russo V, Barone A, Conte E, et al. Bevacizumab compared with macular laser grid photocoagulation for cystoid macular edema in branch retinal vein occlusion. Retina. 2009. 29:511–515.
15. Jaissle GB, Leitritz M, Gelisken F, et al. One-year results after intravitreal bevacizumab therapy for macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2009. 247:27–33.
16. Gutman FA, Zegarra H. The natural course of temporal retinal branch vein occlusion. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol. 1974. 78:OP178–OP192.
17. Hayreh SS, Rojas P, Podhajsky P, et al. Ocular neovascularization with retinal vascular occlusion-III. Incidence of ocular neovascularization with retinal vein occlusion. Ophthalmology. 1983. 90:488–506.
18. Magargal LE, Kimmel AS, Sanborn GE, Annesley WH Jr. Temporal branch retinal vein obstruction: a review. Ophthalmic Surg. 1986. 17:240–246.
19. Roseman RL, Olk RJ. Krypton red laser photocoagulation for branch retinal vein occlusion. Ophthalmology. 1987. 94:1120–1125.
20. Weiter JJ, Zuckerman R. The influence of the photoreceptor-RPE complex on the inner retina. An explanation for the beneficial effects of photocoagulation. Ophthalmology. 1980. 87:1133–1139.
21. Arnarsson A, Stefánsson E. Laser treatment and the mechanism of edema reduction in branch retinal vein occlusion. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000. 41:877–879.
22. The Branch Vein Occlusion Study Group. Argon laser photocoagulation for macular edema in branch vein occlusion. Am J Ophthalmol. 1984. 98:271–282.
23. Rosenfeld PJ, Fung AE, Puliafito CA. Optical coherence tomography findings after an intravitreal injection of bevacizumab (avastin) for macular edema from central retinal vein occlusion. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2005. 36:336–339.
24. Abegg M, Tappeiner C, Wolf-Schnurrbusch U, et al. Treatment of branch retinal vein occlusion induced macular edema with bevacizumab. BMC Ophthalmol. 2008. 8:18.
25. Campochiaro PA, Heier JS, Feiner L, et al. BRAVO Investigators. Ranibizumab for macular edema following branch retinal vein occlusion: six-month primary end point results of a phase III study. Ophthalmology. 2010. 117:1102–1112.
26. Gündüz K, Bakri SJ. Intravitreal bevacizumab for macular oedema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion. Eye (Lond). 2008. 22:1168–1171.
27. Lee SU, Kim SJ, Park YM, et al. Grid laser photocoagulation after intravitreal triamcinolone for macular edema associated with branch retinal vein occlusion. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2009. 50:704–709.
28. Schatz H, Madeira D, McDonald HR, Johnson RN. Progressive enlargement of laser scars following grid laser photocoagulation for diffuse diabetic macular edema. Arch Ophthalmol. 1991. 109:1549–1551.
29. Morgan CM, Schatz H. Atrophic creep of the retinal pigment epithelium after focal macular photocoagulation. Ophthalmology. 1989. 96:96–103.
30. Lewen RM. Subretinal neovascularization complicating laser photocoagulation of diabetic maculopathy. Ophthalmic Surg. 1988. 19:734–737.
31. Lewis H, Schachat AP, Haimann MH, et al. Choroidal neovascularization after laser photocoagulation for diabetic macular edema. Ophthalmology. 1990. 97:503–510.
32. Guyer DR, D'Amico DJ, Smith CW. Subretinal fibrosis after laser photocoagulation for diabetic macular edema. Am J Ophthalmol. 1992. 113:652–656.
33. Rutledge BK, Wallow IH, Poulsen GL. Sub-pigment epithelial membranes after photocoagulation for diabetic macular edema. Arch Ophthalmol. 1993. 111:608–613.
34. Striph GG, Hart WM Jr, Olk RJ. Modified grid laser photocoagulation for diabetic macular edema. The effect on the central visual field. Ophthalmology. 1988. 95:1673–1679.
TOOLS
Similar articles