4.4 Article

Ranibizumab for retinal angiomatous proliferation in neovascular age-related macular degeneration

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00417-007-0679-1

Keywords

retinal angiomatous proliferation; age-related macular degeneration; ranibizumab; anti-VEGF

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background To report the efficacy of intravitreal injection of ranibizumab (Lucentis) in the treatment of retinal angiomatous proliferation (RAP) in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Methods Case review of four consecutive patients who received 3 injections at monthly intervals of intravitreal ranibizumab injections for RAP. The serial changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), optical coherence tomography (OCT), fluorescein angiography (FA), and indocyanine green angiography (ICGA) are presented. Results The baseline mean logMAR BCVA was 0.89 (Snellen equivalent of 20/155). After three injections of ranibizumab, all four patients had visual improvement and the mean logMAR BCVA improved to 0.59 (Snellen equivalent of 20/78). The mean visual improvement was 3.0 lines. All patients also had complete resolution of subretinal fluid after treatment, and the mean OCT central foveal thickness reduced from 438 mu m at baseline to 169 mu m at 3 months. Follow-up FA and ICGA at 3 months showed absence of leakage in three patients with minimal leakage in the remaining patient. One patient had recurrence of RAP at 8 months after commencement of treatment, and repeat ranibizumab injection resulted in resolution of the subretinal fluid and pigment epithelial detachment and visual improvement. Conclusions Intravitreal ranibizumab injections appeared to be an effective treatment for RAP, resulting in visual gain and reduction in macular thickness. Further long-term studies to evaluate the efficacy of intravitreal ranibizumab in RAP are warranted.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available