OBJECTIVE: To compare visual acuityat 6 years of age in eyes that received early treatment for high-risk prethreshold retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) with conventionally managed eyes. METHODS:Infants with symmetrical, high-risk prethreshold ROP (n = 317) had one eye randomized to earlier treatment at high-risk prethreshold disease and the other eye managed conventionally, treated if ROP progressed to threshold severity. For asymmetric cases (n = 84), the high-risk prethreshold eye was randomized to either early treatment or conventional management. The main outcome measure was ETDRS visual acuity measured at 6 years of age by masked testers. Retinal structure was assessed as a secondary outcome. RESULTS: Analysis of all subjects with high-risk prethreshold ROP showed no statistically significant benefit for early treatment (24.3% vs 28.6% [corrected] unfavorable outcome; P = .15). Analysis of 6-year visual acuity results according to the Type 1 and 2 clinical algorithm showed a benefit for Type 1 eyes (25.1% vs 32.8%; P = .02) treated early but not Type 2 eyes (23.6% vs 19.4%; P = .37). Early-treated eyes showed a significantly better structural outcome compared with conventionally managed eyes (8.9% vs 15.2% unfavorable outcome; P < .001), with no greater risk of ocular complications. CONCLUSIONS: Early treatment for Type 1 high-risk prethreshold eyes improved visual acuity outcomes at 6 years of age. Early treatment for Type 2 high-risk prethreshold eyes did not. Application to Clinical Practice Type 1 eyes, not Type 2 eyes, should be treated early. These results are particularly important considering that 52% of Type 2 high-risk prethreshold eyes underwent regression of ROP without requiring treatment. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00027222.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare visual acuity at 6 years of age in eyes that received early treatment for high-risk prethreshold retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) with conventionally managed eyes. METHODS:Infants with symmetrical, high-risk prethreshold ROP (n = 317) had one eye randomized to earlier treatment at high-risk prethreshold disease and the other eye managed conventionally, treated if ROP progressed to threshold severity. For asymmetric cases (n = 84), the high-risk prethreshold eye was randomized to either early treatment or conventional management. The main outcome measure was ETDRS visual acuity measured at 6 years of age by masked testers. Retinal structure was assessed as a secondary outcome. RESULTS: Analysis of all subjects with high-risk prethreshold ROP showed no statistically significant benefit for early treatment (24.3% vs 28.6% [corrected] unfavorable outcome; P = .15). Analysis of 6-year visual acuity results according to the Type 1 and 2 clinical algorithm showed a benefit for Type 1 eyes (25.1% vs 32.8%; P = .02) treated early but not Type 2 eyes (23.6% vs 19.4%; P = .37). Early-treated eyes showed a significantly better structural outcome compared with conventionally managed eyes (8.9% vs 15.2% unfavorable outcome; P < .001), with no greater risk of ocular complications. CONCLUSIONS: Early treatment for Type 1 high-risk prethreshold eyes improved visual acuity outcomes at 6 years of age. Early treatment for Type 2 high-risk prethreshold eyes did not. Application to Clinical Practice Type 1 eyes, not Type 2 eyes, should be treated early. These results are particularly important considering that 52% of Type 2 high-risk prethreshold eyes underwent regression of ROP without requiring treatment. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00027222.
Authors: Robert J Hardy; Earl A Palmer; Velma Dobson; C Gail Summers; Dale L Phelps; Graham E Quinn; William V Good; Betty Tung Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2003-12
Authors: Robert J Hardy; William V Good; Velma Dobson; Earl A Palmer; Dale L Phelps; Michelle Quintos; Betty Tung Journal: Control Clin Trials Date: 2004-06
Authors: Samuel K Houston; Charles C Wykoff; Audina M Berrocal; Ditte J Hess; Timothy G Murray Journal: Lasers Med Sci Date: 2011-12-02 Impact factor: 3.161
Authors: Lejla Vajzovic; Adam L Rothman; Du Tran-Viet; Michelle T Cabrera; Sharon F Freedman; Cynthia A Toth Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2015-01-13 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Eric R Crouch; Raymond T Kraker; David K Wallace; Jonathan M Holmes; Michael X Repka; Janine E Collinge; Don L Bremer; Michael E Gray; Heather A Smith; Paul G Steinkuller Journal: JAMA Ophthalmol Date: 2020-01-01 Impact factor: 7.389
Authors: J M Walz; S Bemme; S Reichl; S Akman; H Breuß; D Süsskind; B Glitz; V C Müller; L Wagenfeld; A Gabel-Pfisterer; S Aisenbrey; K Engelmann; A Koutsonas; T U Krohne; A Stahl Journal: Ophthalmologe Date: 2018-06 Impact factor: 1.059