4.3 Article

Three-year outcome of aflibercept treatment for Japanese patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration

Journal

BMC OPHTHALMOLOGY
Volume 20, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12886-020-01542-6

Keywords

Aflibercept; Age-related macular degeneration; Polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy; Treat-and-extend

Categories

Funding

  1. Bayer Yakuhin, Osaka

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundTo evaluate the three-year outcome after intravitreal aflibercept injection (IAI) for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).MethodsForty-nine treatment-naive nAMD patients (50 eyes) were enrolled in this prospective study. The eyes received IAI at two-month intervals in the first year. The treatment regimen was changed to IAI based on a treat-and-extend approach in the second and third years.ResultsTwenty-nine eyes of 28 patients were successfully followed up over 36months. The nAMD subtypes included 15 eyes with typical AMD and 14 eyes with polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy. The number of IAIs performed over the 3 years was 17.23.1 (mean +/- standard deviation). The mean logMAR, which was 0.42 at baseline, improved to 0.19 (P=0.001) at 12months, and 0.26 (P=0.049) at 36months. The central retinal thickness (CRT) was 329 +/- 120 mu m at baseline, 151 +/- 38 mu m (P<0.001) at 12months, and 143 +/- 61 mu m (P<0.001) at 36months. The mean subfoveal choroidal thickness (SFCT) was 288 +/- 97 mu m at baseline, 243 +/- 82 mu m (P<0.001) at 12months, and 208 +/- 63 mu m (P<0.01) at 36months. The changes in logMAR, CRT, and SFCT over the study period did not differ between typical AMD and PCV.Conclusion Long-term aflibercept injection can achieve visual improvement and reduce the thickness of the retina and choroid in nAMD. Morphological improvement of these tissues may not be sufficient to sustain earlier visual improvement over the long-term.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available