Comparison of clinical efficacy of intravitreal ranibizumab with and without grid laser photocogagulation for macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion

Xiaofang Xu,Fanglin He,Jing Jiang,Jing Wang,Yidan Zhang,Xianqun Fan
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1006-8422.2015.02.14
2015-01-01
Journal of Clinical Ophthalmology
Abstract:Objective To compare the short-term efficacy and safety of intravitreal ranibizumab ( IVR) or IVR combined with grid laser photocogagulation ( GLP) for macular edema ( ME) secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion ( BRVO) .Methods 28 newly diagnosed patients with ME secondary to BRVO were divided into two groups randomly:one group was treated with IVR and the other group was treated with IVR and GLP.Patients were followed up at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 months, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), changes in BCVA and central macular thickness (CMT) were com-pared in each phase and between groups.Results At month 6, BCVA change from baseline was 9.0 ±2.6 letters in the IVR group ( P =0.004) and 12.3 ±3.2 letters in the IVR+GLP group ( P =0.013).Mean CRT changes were 179.4 ±20.8 μm in the IVR group and 202.7 ±15.9 μm in the IVR+GLP group ( P =0.0001).There were nostatistically significant differences in BCVA or CRT changes between groups ( P﹥0.05).The number of intravitreal injections was significantly higher in the IVR group (3.2 ±1.1 injections) than in the IVR+GLP group (1.9 ±1.0 injections, P =0.002 ) .There were no serious side-effects in both groups.Conclusions IVR or IVR +GLP had similar effects on BCVA and CMT in patients with ME secondary to BRVO over a 6-month follow-up period.IVR+GLP is more affordable and toler-able for patients because of less intravitreal injections.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?