Sheng Yang Lim1, Wendy Meihua Wong2, Ivan Seah2, Hwei Wuen Chan2, Xinyi Su2, Gopal Lingam2, Yew Sen Yuen3. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, National University Hospital, National University Health Systems, 5 Lower Kent Ridge Road, Singapore, 119074, Singapore. limshengyang96@gmail.com. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, National University Hospital, National University Health Systems, 5 Lower Kent Ridge Road, Singapore, 119074, Singapore. 3. Department of Ophthalmology, National University Hospital, National University Health Systems, 5 Lower Kent Ridge Road, Singapore, 119074, Singapore. yew_sen_yuen@nuhs.edu.sg.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Various treatment regimens are currently practiced in the treatment of CI-DMO (centre-involving diabetic macular oedema). In recent years, there has been a growing body of evidence supporting a treat and extend (T&E) regimen for DMO which offers the promise of comparable visual and anatomical outcomes while reducing injection burden. This meta-analysis was hence performed to evaluate the aforementioned outcomes in the treatment of DMO. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria. METHODS: A search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Current Contents, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases was performed. We employed the terms 'treat AND extend AND (diabetic AND macular AND edema OR oedema)' to ensure a comprehensive search. The search workflow adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. RESULTS: The pooled analysis of the mean number of injections in 1 year for T&E-aflibercept (AFL), T&E-ranibizumab (RBZ) and collectively was 9.1 (95% CI: 7.63-10.63), 10.0 (95% CI: 9.55-10.47) and 9.6 (95% CI: 8.62-10.49), respectively. Improvements in vision at 1 year for T&E-AFL, T&E-RBZ and collectively were 6.26 (95% CI: 3.24-9.29), 7.14 (95% CI: 4.76-9.52) and 7.08 (95% CI: 5.32-8.84) letters, respectively. The improvements in central subfield thickness at 1 year for T&E-AFL, T&E-RBZ and collectively were 131.94 (95% CI: 100.29-163.60), 108.64 (95% CI: 82.82-134.46) and 121.32 (95% CI: 102.89-139.75) microns, respectively. CONCLUSION: The meta-analysis of T&E for DMO did not show a clear advantage in reducing the number of injections compared to landmark clinical trials with pro-re-nata (PRN) treatment regimens in the first year of treatment with limited gains in visual and anatomical outcomes. However, the T&E approach offers the potential for fewer patient visits, thereby reducing treatment burden. Longer term studies on T&E with a standardised protocol would be required to assess the longevity of the vision gain in the first year despite a likely reduced treatment burden compared to the PRN trials.
PURPOSE: Various treatment regimens are currently practiced in the treatment of CI-DMO (centre-involving diabetic macular oedema). In recent years, there has been a growing body of evidence supporting a treat and extend (T&E) regimen for DMO which offers the promise of comparable visual and anatomical outcomes while reducing injection burden. This meta-analysis was hence performed to evaluate the aforementioned outcomes in the treatment of DMO. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria. METHODS: A search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Current Contents, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases was performed. We employed the terms 'treat AND extend AND (diabetic AND macular AND edema OR oedema)' to ensure a comprehensive search. The search workflow adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. RESULTS: The pooled analysis of the mean number of injections in 1 year for T&E-aflibercept (AFL), T&E-ranibizumab (RBZ) and collectively was 9.1 (95% CI: 7.63-10.63), 10.0 (95% CI: 9.55-10.47) and 9.6 (95% CI: 8.62-10.49), respectively. Improvements in vision at 1 year for T&E-AFL, T&E-RBZ and collectively were 6.26 (95% CI: 3.24-9.29), 7.14 (95% CI: 4.76-9.52) and 7.08 (95% CI: 5.32-8.84) letters, respectively. The improvements in central subfield thickness at 1 year for T&E-AFL, T&E-RBZ and collectively were 131.94 (95% CI: 100.29-163.60), 108.64 (95% CI: 82.82-134.46) and 121.32 (95% CI: 102.89-139.75) microns, respectively. CONCLUSION: The meta-analysis of T&E for DMO did not show a clear advantage in reducing the number of injections compared to landmark clinical trials with pro-re-nata (PRN) treatment regimens in the first year of treatment with limited gains in visual and anatomical outcomes. However, the T&E approach offers the potential for fewer patient visits, thereby reducing treatment burden. Longer term studies on T&E with a standardised protocol would be required to assess the longevity of the vision gain in the first year despite a likely reduced treatment burden compared to the PRN trials.
Authors: K Bailey Freund; Jean-François Korobelnik; Robert Devenyi; Carsten Framme; John Galic; Edward Herbert; Hans Hoerauf; Paolo Lanzetta; Stephan Michels; Paul Mitchell; Jordi Monés; Carl Regillo; Ramin Tadayoni; James Talks; Sebastian Wolf Journal: Retina Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Kang Yeun Pak; Jae Pil Shin; Hyun Woong Kim; Min Sagong; Yu Cheol Kim; Sang Joon Lee; In Young Chung; Sung Who Park; Ji Eun Lee Journal: Ophthalmologica Date: 2020-01-08 Impact factor: 3.250
Authors: John F Payne; Charles C Wykoff; W Lloyd Clark; Beau B Bruce; David S Boyer; David M Brown Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2016-11-08 Impact factor: 12.079