Fengjiao Li1, Le Zhang2, Yanling Wang3, Wenwen Xu1, Wanzhen Jiao1, Aihua Ma4, Bojun Zhao1. 1. a Department of Ophthalmology , Shandong Provincial Hospital affiliated to Shandong University , Jinan , China. 2. b Department of School of public health , Taishan Medical University , Taian , China. 3. c Department of Ophthalmology , Beijing Friendship Hospital Affiliated to Capital Medical University , Beijing , China. 4. d Department of Pediatrics , Shandong Provincial Hospital affiliated to Shandong University , Jinan , China.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of conbercept for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) with different baseline visual acuity. METHODS: This is a retrospective, comparative study. A total of 107 eyes of 107 patients were included. According to the levels of baseline best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and therapeutic regimen, the DME patients were divided into four groups: conbercept treatment subgroup with worse baseline VA (less than 69 letters, Snellen equivalent, 20/50 or worse; n = 37), untreated subgroup with worse baseline VA(n = 28); conbercept treatment subgroup with better baseline VA (78 to 69 letters, Snellen equivalent, 20/32 to 20/40; n = 25), untreated subgroup (n = 17). Patients received one initial intravitreal injection followed by re-treatments based on BCVA loss or increase of central macular thickness (CMT). RESULTS: At month 12, the mean improvement of BCVA was significantly higher in both worse baseline VA group and better baseline VA group with conbercept treatment than that of corresponding untreated controls:18(15) letters vs. -4(6) letters, P < 0.001; 7(1) letters vs. -5(5) letters; P < 0.001; respectively. At month12 the mean CMT from baseline was significantly declined in both worse baseline VA group and better baseline VA group with conbercept treatment than that of respective untreated controls (-212.8 ± 11.9 vs.-44.3 ± 35.3µm,P < 0.001; -116.1 ± 88.9vs.-33.7 ± 49.8µm, P = 0.001; respectively). At the end of twelve month follow-up, the BCVA improvement and CMT declination in worse baseline VA group were more prominent than that in better baseline group (P < 0.001). The mean numbers of injections were 6.7 ± 0.9, 6.5 ± 1.1 in worse baseline VA group and better baseline VA group, respectively (P = 0.35). The two groups have no significant difference in the number of injections. CONCLUSION: Conbercept was effective in the treatment of DME at different levels of baseline BCVA. For worse baseline VA, BCVA improvement was more prominent than that of better VA subgroup.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of conbercept for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) with different baseline visual acuity. METHODS: This is a retrospective, comparative study. A total of 107 eyes of 107 patients were included. According to the levels of baseline best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and therapeutic regimen, the DMEpatients were divided into four groups: conbercept treatment subgroup with worse baseline VA (less than 69 letters, Snellen equivalent, 20/50 or worse; n = 37), untreated subgroup with worse baseline VA(n = 28); conbercept treatment subgroup with better baseline VA (78 to 69 letters, Snellen equivalent, 20/32 to 20/40; n = 25), untreated subgroup (n = 17). Patients received one initial intravitreal injection followed by re-treatments based on BCVA loss or increase of central macular thickness (CMT). RESULTS: At month 12, the mean improvement of BCVA was significantly higher in both worse baseline VA group and better baseline VA group with conbercept treatment than that of corresponding untreated controls:18(15) letters vs. -4(6) letters, P < 0.001; 7(1) letters vs. -5(5) letters; P < 0.001; respectively. At month12 the mean CMT from baseline was significantly declined in both worse baseline VA group and better baseline VA group with conbercept treatment than that of respective untreated controls (-212.8 ± 11.9 vs.-44.3 ± 35.3µm,P < 0.001; -116.1 ± 88.9vs.-33.7 ± 49.8µm, P = 0.001; respectively). At the end of twelve month follow-up, the BCVA improvement and CMT declination in worse baseline VA group were more prominent than that in better baseline group (P < 0.001). The mean numbers of injections were 6.7 ± 0.9, 6.5 ± 1.1 in worse baseline VA group and better baseline VA group, respectively (P = 0.35). The two groups have no significant difference in the number of injections. CONCLUSION: Conbercept was effective in the treatment of DME at different levels of baseline BCVA. For worse baseline VA, BCVA improvement was more prominent than that of better VA subgroup.
Entities:
Keywords:
Conbercept; central macular thickness; diabetic macular edema; intravitreal injection
Authors: Mohammad Ali Sadiq; Muhammad Sohail Halim; Muhammad Hassan; Neil Onghanseng; Irmak Karaca; Aniruddha Agarwal; Rubbia Afridi; Yasir J Sepah; Diana V Do; Quan Dong Nguyen Journal: Int J Retina Vitreous Date: 2020-07-08