PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of intravitreal injections of triamcinolone acetonide (TA) and that of bevacizumab for macular oedema because of branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO). DESIGN: Prospective, comparative, randomized, interventional clinical trial. METHODS:Forty-three eyes of 43 patients with macular oedema because of BRVO were randomly assigned to 4-mg intravitreal injections of TA (IVTA)(21 patients, IVTA group) or 1.25-mg intravitreal injections of bevacizumab (IVB) (22 patients, IVB group) and followed for 12 months. No additional treatments were administered for 3 months after the initial injection; additional injections were administered when macular oedema recurred between 3 and 12 months after the initial injection. The best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and the central retinal thickness (CRT) were measured at baseline and monthly. The main outcome measures were changes in the logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution BCVA and CRT from baseline to 12 months. RESULTS:Eighteen eyes of 18 patients in the IVTA group and 18 eyes of 18 patients in the IVB group completed follow-up at 12 months. The mean improvements in BCVA from baseline to 12 months were 0.12 in the IVTA group and 0.33 in the IVB group, which was significantly (p = 0.032) higher than in the IVTA group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the mean reduction in CRT from baseline to 12 months after the initial injection. Two eyes in the IVTA group required intraocular pressure-lowering medications. CONCLUSION: Intravitreal injection of bevacizumab may be of greater benefit than that of TA for macular oedema because of BRVO.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of intravitreal injections of triamcinolone acetonide (TA) and that of bevacizumab for macular oedema because of branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO). DESIGN: Prospective, comparative, randomized, interventional clinical trial. METHODS: Forty-three eyes of 43 patients with macular oedema because of BRVO were randomly assigned to 4-mg intravitreal injections of TA (IVTA)(21 patients, IVTA group) or 1.25-mg intravitreal injections of bevacizumab (IVB) (22 patients, IVB group) and followed for 12 months. No additional treatments were administered for 3 months after the initial injection; additional injections were administered when macular oedema recurred between 3 and 12 months after the initial injection. The best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and the central retinal thickness (CRT) were measured at baseline and monthly. The main outcome measures were changes in the logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution BCVA and CRT from baseline to 12 months. RESULTS: Eighteen eyes of 18 patients in the IVTA group and 18 eyes of 18 patients in the IVB group completed follow-up at 12 months. The mean improvements in BCVA from baseline to 12 months were 0.12 in the IVTA group and 0.33 in the IVB group, which was significantly (p = 0.032) higher than in the IVTA group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the mean reduction in CRT from baseline to 12 months after the initial injection. Two eyes in the IVTA group required intraocular pressure-lowering medications. CONCLUSION: Intravitreal injection of bevacizumab may be of greater benefit than that of TA for macular oedema because of BRVO.