4.2 Article

Clinical Application of Intravitreal Aflibercept Injection for Diabetic Macular Edema Comparing Two Loading Regimens

Journal

MEDICINA-LITHUANIA
Volume 59, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/medicina59030558

Keywords

aflibercept; diabetic retinopathy; macular edema; intravitreal injection

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study compared the efficacy of three and five monthly loading regimens of intravitreal aflibercept injection for diabetic macular edema (DME) treatment. The results showed that the five-month loading regimen had better outcomes, reducing the rate of recurrence and improving the duration of treatment effectiveness.
Background and Objectives: We investigated and compared the efficacy of three and five monthly loading regimens of an intravitreal aflibercept injection (IVA) in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective study that included patients diagnosed with DME and treated with an either three or five monthly aflibercept loading regimen from July 2018 to March 2022. Information on clinical characteristics and changes in the central retinal thickness (CRT) were obtained from medical records. Results: In total, 44 eyes of 44 patients with DME treated with IVA were included in this study, with 30 eyes treated with 3-monthly loadings (three-loading group) and 14 eyes with 5-monthly loadings (five-loading group). The mean CRT significantly decreased from the baseline one month after loading in both the three-loading and five-loading groups (p < 0.001). Four cases were refractory to treatment in the three-loading group, while there were no cases of refractory DME in the five-loading group. The stability rate was significantly higher in the five-loading group at three months after loading (p = 0.033). Conclusions: Five-monthly loading regimens of IVA might be favorable for DME considering the rate of refractory cases, stable duration, and the importance of early responsiveness to IVA in DME.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available