4.2 Article

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

期刊

MEDICINA-LITHUANIA
卷 59, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/medicina59030558

关键词

aflibercept; diabetic retinopathy; macular edema; intravitreal injection

向作者/读者索取更多资源

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.

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

4.2
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