4.4 Article

RESPONSE OF PIGMENT EPITHELIAL DETACHMENTS TO INTRAVITREAL AFLIBERCEPT AMONG PATIENTS WITH TREATMENT-RESISTANT NEOVASCULAR AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000000409

关键词

neovascular age-related macular degeneration; pigment epithelial detachment; aflibercept

资金

  1. Bayer Corporation Global

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To assess the effect of intravitreal aflibercept on pigment epithelial detachment (PED) in patients with treatment-resistant neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Methods: Forty-six patients with vascularized PEDs participating in a wider, prospective clinical trial of treatment-resistant neovascular age-related macular degeneration received 2-mg aflibercept as 3 loading doses 1 month apart, followed by further 2-monthly doses over a total 12-month period. Change in PED dimensions and reflective properties were assessed by optical coherence tomography. Reflectivity was subclassified as solid (hyperreflective), hollow (hyporeflective), or mixed (elements of both). Results: Aflibercept reduced PED height, width, and length at 48 weeks compared with baseline values (P <= 0.01 for all). Reductions in PED height were correlated with reductions in central macular thickness at 48 weeks (R-2 = 0.36, P < 0.001). There was no significant correlation between PED height decrease and visual acuity changes at 48 weeks. Solid PEDs were less likely to experience reductions in all three dimensions than either hollow or mixed PEDs. Conclusion: Aflibercept is effective in reducing PED dimensions in treatment-resistant patients and is most effective in PEDs demonstrating some hyporeflective optical coherence tomography characteristics. Reduction in PED dimensions correlated with central macular thickness, but not with visual acuity changes. The role of PEDs as markers of disease requires further investigation; however, lesions should be monitored for retinal fluid recurrence.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据