DME

DME
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的这项研究的目的是研究类固醇转换的时机对糖尿病性黄斑水肿(DME)眼的视觉和解剖学结果的影响,这些糖尿病性黄斑水肿对多种玻璃体内抗血管内皮生长因子(抗-VEGF)注射反应不足。在DME的治疗中,抗VEGF注射通常是最初的作用过程。然而,在DME持续的情况下,尽管抗VEGF治疗,玻璃体内地塞米松植入物(Ozurdex®,AllerganInc.,Irvine,CA)经常被利用。尽管如此,对于过渡到类固醇治疗的最佳时机仍缺乏共识.这项研究旨在阐明在顽固性DME的情况下调整类固醇转换时间的潜在好处。方法回顾性分析77例顽固性DME患者(n=105)眼,介入,包括三组的比较研究:参与者在三次抗VEGF注射后转换为类固醇植入物(组I),四到六次抗VEGF注射(第二组),和超过六个抗VEGF注射(组III)。抗VEGF治疗失败定义为中央视网膜厚度(CRT)≥300微米和/或缺乏视觉改善(根据Snellen视力≤1行视觉增益)。最后一次随访在注射Ozurdex®10-12周后进行。结果19眼(46%)改善,17眼(50%),第一组有10只眼(33%),II,III,分别,改用地塞米松植入物后。在第二组(32只眼,94%)。在所有三组中,CRT的降低具有统计学意义。结论玻璃体腔注射地塞米松可改善抗VEGF抵抗DME眼的功能和形态学结果。注射四到六次抗VEGF后,转换为类固醇植入物可获得最佳功能效果.
    Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of the timing of the steroid switch on both visual and anatomical outcomes in diabetic macular edema (DME) eyes that have shown an inadequate response to multiple intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections. In the treatment of DME, anti-VEGF injections are typically the initial course of action. However, in cases where DME persists despite anti-VEGF treatment, intravitreal dexamethasone implants (Ozurdex®, Allergan Inc., Irvine, CA) are often utilized. Despite this, there remains a lack of consensus regarding the optimal timing for transitioning to steroid treatment. This study aims to shed light on the potential benefits of adjusting the timing of the steroid switch in cases of recalcitrant DME.  Methods The eyes (n = 105) of 77 patients with recalcitrant DME were included in this retrospective, interventional, comparative study comprising three groups: participants switched to steroid implants after three anti-VEGF injections (Group I), four to six anti-VEGF injections (Group II), and more than six anti-VEGF injections (Group III). Anti-VEGF treatment failure was defined as a central retinal thickness (CRT) of ≥300 microns and/or a lack of visual improvement (≤1 line of visual gain according to Snellen acuity). The last follow-up took place after 10-12 weeks of Ozurdex® injections. Results Improvement was observed in 19 eyes (46%), 17 eyes (50%), and 10 eyes (33%) in Groups I, II, and III, respectively, after switching to dexamethasone implants. The best overall results (an improvement in vision and stabilization) were seen in Group II (32 eyes, 94%). The decrease in CRT was statistically significant in all three groups.  Conclusion Intravitreal dexamethasone implants improved functional and morphological outcomes in anti-VEGF-resistant DME eyes. After four to six anti-VEGF injections, switching to a steroid implant resulted in the best functional results.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:本研究的目的是评估在慢性糖尿病性黄斑水肿(DME)患者最后一次玻璃体内植入地塞米松(DEXi)1个月后注射醋酸氟轻松(FAci)的疗效和安全性。
    方法:在经常接受地塞米松玻璃体内植入物治疗的慢性DME假晶状体患者中进行的回顾性多中心研究(DEXi;DME复发时间≤6个月),在上次DEXi后1个月收到FAci,至少6个月的随访。最佳矫正视力(BCVA),光学相干断层扫描的中央黄斑厚度(CMT),在注射FAci(M0)当天评估眼内压(IOP)和其他治疗,1(M1)和3个月(M3)后,然后每3个月。
    结果:共纳入34例患者的41只眼。在M0时,患者的平均年龄为68.7±9.8岁,DME的平均持续时间为63.9±22.9个月,两次DEXi之间的平均间隔为14.2±3.3周.71%的患者可获得M12数据。在基线,平均BCVA,CMT和IOP为63.2±16.6个字母,299.4±103.3µm,16.2±4.5mmHg,分别,并在随访期间保持稳定。在M12时,14%的患者需要额外的玻璃体内治疗。
    结论:慢性DME患者对DEXi反应良好,但需要每6个月重复注射一次,在上次DEXi有效且安全的1个月后切换到FAci。需要进一步的前瞻性随机对照研究来证实这些发现,并确定最后一个DEXi和第一个FAci之间的最佳间隔。
    BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of fluocinolone acetonide implant (FAci) injected 1 month after the last dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEXi) in chronic diabetic macular oedema (DME) patients.
    METHODS: Retrospective multicentric study conducted in pseudophakic patients with chronic DME frequently treated with dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEXi; time to DME recurrence ≤ 6 months), receiving FAci 1 month after the last DEXi, with at least a 6-month follow-up. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT) on optical coherence tomography, intraocular pressure (IOP) and additional treatments were assessed on the day of FAci injection (M0), 1 (M1) and 3 months (M3) later and then every 3 months.
    RESULTS: A total of 41 eyes from 34 patients were included. At M0, patients\' mean age was 68.7 ± 9.8 years, the mean DME duration was 63.9 ± 22.9 months, the mean interval between two DEXi was 14.2 ± 3.3 weeks. M12 data were available for 71% of patients. At baseline, the mean BCVA, CMT and IOP were 63.2 ± 16.6 letters, 299.4 ± 103.3 µm, and 16.2 ± 4.5 mmHg, respectively, and remained stable during the follow-up. At M12, 14% of patients required additional intravitreal treatments.
    CONCLUSIONS: In pseudophakic patients with chronic DME showing good response to DEXi but requiring repeated injections every < 6 months, switching to FAci 1 month after the last DEXi was effective and safe. Further prospective randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm these findings, and to determine the best interval between the last DEXi and the first FAci.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:糖尿病需要持续监测和护理,以防止长期不良健康结局。在加拿大,为应对2020年3月的冠状病毒-2019(COVID-19)大流行,实施了检疫限制。初级保健糖尿病诊所限制了他们的当面服务,并建议通过虚拟就诊来管理2型糖尿病(T2D),并减少常规糖尿病相关实验室检查和筛查的频率。
    方法:这项回顾性横断面研究使用了安大略省初级保健电子病历数据库中的去识别患者记录,加拿大,确定在2018年3月1日至2021年2月28日期间至少有1个医疗保健接触点的T2D患者.每月或每年描述结果:1)初级保健就诊的人数(当面与虚拟);2)转诊的人数;3)每种重要/实验室措施的人数;4)重要/实验室措施的结果。
    结果:共纳入16,845例T2D患者。与大流行前相比,COVID-19期间使用任何初级保健的T2D人群减少了16.8%,至少1次虚拟访视的人数增加了330.4%.与大流行前相比,在大流行期间,有重要/实验室措施的人越来越少。然而,在有测试结果的人中,在大流行前和大流行期间,所有测试的平均值相似。
    结论:需要进一步的研究来了解减少现场临床护理对整个T2D患者的影响。
    OBJECTIVE: Diabetes requires ongoing monitoring and care to prevent long-term adverse health outcomes. In Canada, quarantine restrictions were put into place to address the coronavirus-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in March 2020. Primary care diabetes clinics limited their in-person services and were advised to manage type 2 diabetes (T2D) through virtual visits and reduce the frequency of routine diabetes-related lab tests and screening.
    METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study used de-identified patient records from a primary care electronic medical records database in Ontario, Canada, to identify people with T2D who had at least 1 health-care touchpoint between March 1, 2018, and February 28, 2021. Outcomes were described on a monthly or yearly basis: 1) number of people with primary care visits (in-person vs virtual); 2) number of people with referrals; 3) number of people with each of the vital/lab measures; and 4) results of the vital/lab measures.
    RESULTS: A total of 16,845 individuals with T2D were included. Compared with the pre-pandemic period, the COVID-19 period had a 16.8% reduction in the T2D population utilizing any primary care and an increase of 330.4% in the number of people with at least 1 virtual visit. Compared with the pre-pandemic period, fewer people had vital/lab measures in the pandemic period. However, among the people with the test results available, the average values for all tests were similar in the pre- and pandemic periods.
    CONCLUSIONS: Further research is needed to understand the impact of the reduction of in-person clinical care on the entire population with T2D.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    未经证实:据报道,长期注射抗VEGF治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿(DME)后,中央凹无血管区(FAZ)减少。这项研究旨在介绍DME患者玻璃体切除术后扫频源OCT血管造影的变化。
    UNASSIGNED:回顾性介入研究。
    UNASISIGNED:纳入35只眼(平均年龄:62岁)。
    UNASSIGNED:患者在进行DME内界膜剥离的玻璃体切除术后随访12个月。
    UNASSIGNED:测量了以下参数:中央视网膜厚度(CRT),中央脉络膜厚度,肤浅的FAZ,深FAZ(dFAZ),浅层和深视网膜层的血管密度(dVD)。
    UNASSIGNED:术后CRT和浅表FAZ明显下降(分别为401μm-338μm;P<0.00,401μm-293μm;P<0.001)。初始视力(VA)从20/160(最小分辨率角度[LogMAR]的0.97对数)提高到20/80(0.62LogMAR)(P<0.001)。视网膜浅层血管密度率为42.3%,术后下降,随访结束时达到41.6%。术后1周dVD率为28.9%,在整个观察期间均保持稳定。最终VA最重要的预后因素为术前VA和术前CRT,而水肿消退时的dFAZ和dVD也与最终VA相关。
    未经证实:玻璃体切除术后浅表FAZ减少,这可能表明玻璃体切除术对DME有保护作用,类似于抗VEGF注射。更好的最终功能结果的预后因素是更好的初始VA和更低的玻璃体切除术前的CRT,除了较低的dFAZ直径和较高的dVD在水肿解决的时刻。
    UNASSIGNED:作者对本文讨论的任何材料都没有专有或商业利益。
    UNASSIGNED: The foveal avascular zone (FAZ) has been reported to decrease after anti-VEGF injections in diabetic macular edema (DME) in the long term. This study aimed to present the changes in swept-source OCT angiography after vitrectomy in patients with DME.
    UNASSIGNED: Retrospective interventional study.
    UNASSIGNED: Thirty-five eyes were included (mean age: 62 years).
    UNASSIGNED: Patients were followed for 12 months after vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling for DME.
    UNASSIGNED: The following parameters were measured: central retinal thickness (CRT), central choroidal thickness, superficial FAZ, deep FAZ (dFAZ), and vessel density in the superficial and deep retinal layers (dVD).
    UNASSIGNED: The CRT and superficial FAZ significantly decreased after surgery (401 μm-338 μm; P < 0.00, 401 μm-293 μm; P < 0.001, respectively). Initial visual acuity (VA) improved from 20/160 (0.97 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [LogMAR]) to 20/80 (0.62 LogMAR) (P < 0.001). The vessel density in the superficial retinal layers rate was 42.3% and decreased after surgery, reaching 41.6% at the end of the follow-up. The dVD rate 1 week after surgery was 28.9% and remained stable throughout the observation period. The most important prognostic factors for the final VA were preoperative VA and preoperative CRT, while the dFAZ and dVD at the time of edema resolution also correlated with the final VA.
    UNASSIGNED: The superficial FAZ decreases after vitrectomy, which might indicate that vitrectomy has a protective effect on DME, similar to anti-VEGF injections. Prognostic factors for better final functional results are better initial VA and lower CRT before vitrectomy, in addition to a lower dFAZ diameter and a higher dVD at the moment of edema resolution.
    UNASSIGNED: The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    UASSIGNED:评估THR-687在中心累及的糖尿病性黄斑水肿(DME)患者中的安全性和初步疗效。
    未经评估:第1阶段,开放标签,多中心,3+3剂量递增研究,随访3个月。
    未经证实:18岁或以上的DME导致视力障碍患者。
    未经批准:玻璃体内单次注射THR-687(0.4mg,1.0mg,或2.5毫克)。
    未经评估:主要结果指标是剂量限制性毒性(DLT)的发生率。次要结果指标是不良事件(AE)的发生率,包括实验室异常的发生。探索性结果测量包括最佳矫正视力(BCVA)和中央亚区厚度(CST)的基线变化,荧光素血管造影术中缺血和渗漏的评估,和血浆中的THR-687水平。
    未经授权:12例患者接受治疗:3例患者接受0.4mgTHR-687,3例患者接受1.0mgTHR-687,6例患者接受2.5mgTHR-687。大多数患者为男性(9/12患者)。他们的平均年龄为57.8岁。在任何测试的剂量水平下均未报告DLT或严重的AE。总的来说,报告了12名患者中的5名研究眼睛中的9个AE。其中,研究者认为12例患者中有3例出现4例不良事件,所有这些都是温和的,从注射当天开始,并且在没有治疗的情况下在28天内解决。总的来说,在所有研究访视中观察到BCVA相对于基线的平均增加,起病迅速(第7天的7.2早期治疗糖尿病视网膜病变研究[ETDRS]字母),并且持续至研究结束(第3个月的8.3个ETDRS字母).观察到CST的平均下降直至第1个月。总的来说,在测试的最高THR-687剂量水平下,平均BCVA增加和CST降低最高.在注射后7天,在血浆中检测不到THR-687。
    未经评估:在测试的所有剂量水平下,玻璃体内单次注射THR-687是安全且耐受性良好的.通过BCVA的快速增加和3个月的耐久性和CST的降低观察到初步疗效。
    UNASSIGNED: To evaluate the safety and preliminary efficacy of THR-687 in patients with center-involved diabetic macular edema (DME).
    UNASSIGNED: Phase 1, open-label, multicenter, 3 + 3 dose-escalation study with 3-month follow-up.
    UNASSIGNED: Patients 18 years of age or older with visual impairment resulting from DME.
    UNASSIGNED: Single intravitreal injection of THR-687 (0.4 mg, 1.0 mg, or 2.5 mg).
    UNASSIGNED: The primary outcome measure was the incidence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). The secondary outcome measure was the incidence of adverse events (AEs), including the occurrence of laboratory abnormalities. Exploratory outcome measures included changes from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central subfield thickness (CST), assessments of ischemia and leakage on fluorescein angiography, and THR-687 levels in plasma.
    UNASSIGNED: Twelve patients were treated: 3 patients received 0.4 mg of THR-687, 3 patients received 1.0 mg of THR-687, and 6 patients received 2.5 mg of THR-687. Most patients were men (9/12 patients). Their mean age was 57.8 years. No DLTs or serious AEs were reported at any of the dose levels tested. Overall, 9 AEs in the study eye were reported for 5 of 12 patients. Of those, 4 AEs in 3 of 12 patients were deemed treatment related by the investigator, all of which were mild, started on the day of the injection, and had resolved within 28 days without treatment. Overall, mean gains from baseline in BCVA were observed at all study visits with a rapid onset (7.2 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study [ETDRS] letters at day 7) and a durability up to the end of the study (8.3 ETDRS letters at month 3). A mean decrease in CST was observed up to month 1. Overall, the mean BCVA gains and CST decreases were highest at the highest THR-687 dose level tested. THR-687 was undetectable in plasma at 7 days after the injection.
    UNASSIGNED: At all dose levels tested, a single intravitreal injection of THR-687 was safe and well tolerated. Preliminary efficacy was observed by a rapid gain in BCVA with 3 months\' durability and a decrease in CST up to 1 month after the injection.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Randomized Controlled Trial
    目的:为了确定临床疗效,安全,和亚阈值微脉冲激光(SML)的成本效益,与标准激光器(SL)相比,糖尿病性黄斑水肿(DME),中央视网膜厚度(CRT)<400μm。
    方法:务实,多中心,隐藏分配,双面蒙面,随机化,非劣效性试验。
    方法:患有中心累及DME<400μm且最佳矫正视力(BCVA)>24只早期糖尿病视网膜病变研究(ETDRS)字母的成年人一只/两只眼睛。
    方法:随机化1:1至577nmSML或SL治疗。允许休养。如果发生10个或更多ETDRS字母丢失,则允许使用玻璃体内抗血管内皮生长因子疗法或类固醇进行抢救,CRT增加>400μm,或者两者兼而有之。
    方法:主要结果是24个月时研究眼BCVA的平均变化(非劣效性边缘5个ETDRS字母)。次要结果是双眼BCVA从基线到第24个月的平均变化;CRT和研究眼中Humphrey10-2视野的平均偏差;符合驾驶标准的百分比;EuroQoLEQ-5D-5L,25项国家眼科研究所视觉功能问卷(NEI-VFQ-25),和视力和生活质量指数(VisQoL)评分;获得的每质量调整生命年(QALYs)成本;不良反应;以及激光和抢救治疗的数量。
    结果:该研究完全招募(n=266);87%的SML治疗患者和86%的SL治疗患者具有主要结果数据。SML和SL组从基线到第24个月的平均±标准偏差BCVA变化为-2.43±8.20个字母和-0.45±6.72个字母,分别。亚阈值微脉冲激光治疗不仅被认为是不差的,而且等同于SL治疗,因为95%的置信区间(CI;-3.9至-0.04字母)完全位于允许的最大差异(5ETDRS字母)的上下边缘内。双眼BCVA无统计学差异(0.32个ETDRS字母;95%CI,-0.99至1.64个ETDRS字母;P=0.63);CRT(-0.64μm;95%CI,-14.25至12.98μm;P=0.93);视野平均偏差(0.39分贝(dB);95%CI,-0.23至1.02dB;P=0.21,达到驱动点差异标准1.6%;95%CI,-25.3%至28.5%;P=0.91);不良反应(风险比,0.28;95%CI,0.06-1.34;P=0.11);抢救治疗(百分点差异,-2.8%;95%CI,-13.1%至7.5%;P=0.59);或EQ-5D,NEI-VFQ-25或VisQoL分数。SML组激光治疗次数较高(0.48;95%CI,0.18-0.79;P=0.002)。基本情况分析表明,成本或QALY没有差异。
    结论:亚阈值微脉冲激光治疗与SL治疗相当,需要略高的激光治疗。
    To determine clinical effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of subthreshold micropulse laser (SML), compared with standard laser (SL), for diabetic macular edema (DME) with central retinal thickness (CRT) < 400 μm.
    Pragmatic, multicenter, allocation-concealed, double-masked, randomized, noninferiority trial.
    Adults with center-involved DME < 400 μm and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of > 24 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters in one/both eyes.
    Randomization 1:1 to 577 nm SML or SL treatment. Retreatments were allowed. Rescue with intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapies or steroids was permitted if 10 or more ETDRS letter loss occurred, CRT increased > 400 μm, or both.
    Primary outcome was mean change in BCVA in the study eye at 24 months (noninferiority margin 5 ETDRS letters). Secondary outcomes were mean change from baseline to month 24 in binocular BCVA; CRT and mean deviation of Humphrey 10-2 visual field in the study eye; percentage meeting driving standards; EuroQoL EQ-5D-5L, 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ-25), and Vision and Quality of Life Index (VisQoL) scores; cost per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained; adverse effects; and number of laser and rescue treatments.
    The study recruited fully (n = 266); 87% of SML-treated and 86% of SL-treated patients had primary outcome data. Mean ± standard deviation BCVA change from baseline to month 24 was -2.43 ± 8.20 letters and -0.45 ± 6.72 letters in the SML and SL groups, respectively. Subthreshold micropulse laser therapy was deemed not only noninferior but also equivalent to SL therapy because the 95% confidence interval (CI; -3.9 to -0.04 letters) lay wholly within both upper and lower margins of the permitted maximum difference (5 ETDRS letters). No statistically significant difference was found in binocular BCVA (0.32 ETDRS letters; 95% CI, -0.99 to 1.64 ETDRS letters; P = 0.63); CRT (-0.64 μm; 95% CI, -14.25 to 12.98 μm; P = 0.93); mean deviation of the visual field (0.39 decibels (dB); 95% CI, -0.23 to 1.02 dB; P = 0.21); meeting driving standards (percentage point difference, 1.6%; 95% CI, -25.3% to 28.5%; P = 0.91); adverse effects (risk ratio, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.06-1.34; P = 0.11); rescue treatments (percentage point difference, -2.8%; 95% CI, -13.1% to 7.5%; P = 0.59); or EQ-5D, NEI-VFQ-25, or VisQoL scores. Number of laser treatments was higher in the SML group (0.48; 95% CI, 0.18-0.79; P = 0.002). Base-case analysis indicated no differences in costs or QALYs.
    Subthreshold micropulse laser therapy was equivalent to SL therapy, requiring slightly higher laser treatments.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:本研究的目的是比较患有糖尿病性黄斑水肿的患者行玻璃体切除术的结果与患者行连续抗VEGF治疗的结果。
    方法:对14例双眼糖尿病性黄斑水肿患者进行回顾性介入研究。较好的眼睛总是适合阿柏西普注射(第1组),较差的眼行玻璃体切除术(第2组).随访持续了12个月。测量以下参数:视敏度(V),中央视网膜厚度(CRT),最大视网膜厚度(MRT),中央脉络膜厚度(CCT),浅凹无血管区(sFAZ)和深凹无血管区(dFAZ),浅表(sVD)和深(dVD)视网膜血管水平的血管密度。
    结果:在任何时间点,各组之间的分析因素均无统计学差异。双眼视力恢复时间相同(F=0.91,p=0.449)。第2组的最终sFAZ(中位数196μm)明显小于第1组(中位数375μm;U=101.0;p=0.022;r=0.44)。
    结论:这两种技术在1年后可导致视力的类似改善和CRT的降低。所有眼睛的sFAZ都下降了,玻璃体切除术后的程度更高。
    OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the results of vitrectomy performed in patients\' worse eyes with diabetic macular edema to the results of continuous anti-VEGF treatment performed in patients\' fellow eyes.
    METHODS: A retrospective interventional study of 14 patients with diabetic macular edema in both eyes. The better eye was always qualified for aflibercept injections (group 1), and the worse eye was scheduled for vitrectomy (group 2). The follow-up lasted 12 months. The following parameters were measured: visual acuity (V), central retinal thickness (CRT), maximum retinal thickness (MRT), central choroidal thickness (CCT), superficial fovea avascular zone (sFAZ) and deep fovea avascular zone (dFAZ), and vessel density at the level of superficial (sVD) and deep (dVD) retinal vessels.
    RESULTS: None of the analyzed factors differed between groups with statistical significance at any timepoint. The time of recovery of vision was identical in both eyes (F = 0.91, p = 0.449). The final sFAZ was significantly smaller for group 2 (median 196 μm) than for group 1 (median 375 μm; U = 101.0; p = 0.022; r = 0.44).
    CONCLUSIONS: Both techniques resulted in similar improvements in visual acuity and decreases in CRT after 1 year. sFAZ decreased in all eyes, with a higher extent after vitrectomy.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:评估玻璃体内注射雷珠单抗(IVR)治疗后糖尿病性视网膜病变(DR)或视网膜分支血管阻塞(BRVO)继发的黄斑囊样水肿(CME)患者的视网膜硬渗出物(HEs)进展,并确定HEs恶化的危险因素。
    方法:这项回顾性研究纳入了288例DR或BRVO继发CME的288只眼(每位患者一只眼)。所有患者均以每月间隔在玻璃体内使用三种负荷剂量的雷珠单抗治疗。观察HEs的形态特征,在基线时使用半自动方法对HE区域进行定量,在第一剂IVR治疗后1个月和第三剂IVR治疗后1个月。HE进展定义为HE严重程度量表增加>=2级。比较DR和BRVO组之间的最佳矫正视力(BCVA)和HE区域的改变。并采用logistic回归分析确定HEs加重的危险因素。
    结果:IVR治疗后所有眼的视网膜HE均发生形态学改变,尽管某些眼睛的HE面积没有明显变化。DR组比BRVO组有更高比例的眼睛进展HEs面积(34.9%vs.21.8%,P=0.019)首次给药IVR后1个月。DR和BRVO组均在第三次注射后1个月出现增大的HE百分比降低,但DR组仍然高于BRVO组(17.1%vs.8.4%,P=0.027)。在基线,VA和HEs区域之间没有相关性。在第一和第三剂量的IVR之后,HEs严重程度与VA随时间的变化之间仍然没有一致的相关性.此外,视网膜下液(SRF)的CME与HE进展的高风险相关(P=0.001)。在单变量和多变量回归分析中,CME持续时间长和血清低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)水平高被确定为IVR治疗后HEs进展的危险因素(分别为赔率(OR)=1.88,P=0.012和OR=1.14,P=0.021)。
    结论:在IVR治疗CME后,广泛观察到视网膜HE区域的改变。继发于DR的CME的眼睛比BRVO眼睛具有更高的进展性HE百分比。带有SRF的DME,CME的持续时间延长,高LDL-C水平是IVR治疗后HEs恶化的潜在危险因素。
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate retinal hard exudates (HEs) progression in patients with cystoid macular edema (CME) secondary to diabetic retinopathy (DR) or branch retinal vascular occlusion (BRVO) after intravitreal injections of ranibizumab (IVR) treatment and identify the risk factors for the deterioration of HEs.
    METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled 288 eyes with center-involving CME secondary to DR or BRVO from 288 patients (one eye per patient). All patients were treated with three loading doses of ranibizumab intravitreally at a monthly interval. The morphologic features of HEs were observed, and the HEs areas were quantified using a semi-automatic method at baseline, 1 month after the first dose of IVR and 1 month after the third dose of IVR therapy. HEs progression was defined as having a > =2-grade increase in the HEs severity scale. The best-corrected vision acuity (BCVA) and alterations in HEs areas were compared between DR and BRVO groups. And logistic regression analyses were used to identify the risk factors for HEs exacerbation.
    RESULTS: Morphological changes of retinal HEs occurred in all eyes after IVR therapy, although HEs area was not significantly changed in some eyes. DR group has a higher percentage of eyes with progressed HEs area than the BRVO groups (34.9% vs. 21.8%, P = 0.019) 1 month after the first dose of IVR. Both DR and BRVO groups had a decreased percentage of enlarged HEs 1 month after the third injection, but the DR group is still higher than the BRVO group (17.1% vs. 8.4%, P = 0.027). At baseline, there was no correlation between VA and HEs areas. After the first and third doses of IVR, there still was no consistent correlation between HEs severity and change in VA over time. Furthermore, CME with subretinal fluid (SRF) is associated with a higher risk of HEs progression (P = 0.001). Long CME duration and high serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level were identified as risk factors for HEs progression following IVR treatment in both univariable and multivariable regression analyses (Odds ratio (OR) = 1.88, P = 0.012 and OR = 1.14, P = 0.021, respectively).
    CONCLUSIONS: Alterations in the area of retinal HEs are widely observed after IVR treatment for CME. The eyes with CME secondary to DR have a higher percentage of progressed HEs than the BRVO eyes. DME with SRF, extended duration of CME, and high LDL-C level are potential risk factors of deteriorated HEs after IVR treatment.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:确定参加READ-3研究的受试者的基线特征,这些特征将预测第1年黄斑水肿对雷珠单抗(RBZ)治疗的反应。
    方法:在对READ-3随机分组的事后分析中,多中心2期临床试验,糖尿病性黄斑水肿(DME)患者随机接受每月一次的玻璃体内注射RBZ(0.5mg或2.0mg),连续6次,然后根据预定义的再治疗标准进行必要治疗.在这项子研究中,受试者分为三组(持续性,回弹,并解决)基于12个月(M12)的水肿状态。根据基线特征,使用多元逻辑回归评估水肿结果M12的概率。
    结果:本子研究分析了152名受试者中的123名。在各研究组的基线(BL)中心子场厚度(CST)中观察到显著差异(p<0.05)。BLCST是M12时水肿结果的显著预测因子,如果BLCST>570μm(p<0.05),则受试者具有持续性水肿的概率>80%。当控制RBZ的剂量时,这种关联仍然存在(相对风险(RR),1.007;p<0.05)。BLCST也是无玻璃体黄斑粘连(VMA)的受试者在M12时持续水肿的重要预测因子(CST>570μm时持续水肿的概率>80%[RR,1.006;p<0.05])。然而,在VMA面前,BLCST不再是12个月时持续性水肿的显著预测因子(RR,1.005;p>0.05)。
    结论:基线时具有高CST(>570μm)的受试者可能无法从玻璃体内反复注射抗VEGF以消除水肿中受益。
    OBJECTIVE: To identify baseline characteristics of subjects enrolled in the READ-3 study that would predict the response of macular edema to ranibizumab (RBZ) therapy at year 1.
    METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of the READ-3 randomized, multicenter phase 2 clinical trial, subjects with diabetic macular edema (DME) were randomized to receive monthly intravitreal injections of RBZ (0.5 or 2.0 mg) for 6 consecutive injections followed by as-needed treatments based on pre-defined retreatment criteria. In this sub-study, subjects were divided into three groups (persistent, rebound, and resolved) based on edema status at month 12 (M12). Multi-logistic regression was utilized to assess the probability of edema outcomes M12, based on the baseline characteristics.
    RESULTS: One hundred twenty-three out of 152 subjects were analyzed for this sub-study. A significant difference was observed in the baseline (BL) central subfield thickness (CST) among the study groups (p < 0.05). BL CST was a significant predictor for edema outcome at M12 with > 80% probability of the subject having persistent edema if BL CST was > 570 μm (p < 0.05). This association persisted when controlled for the dose of RBZ (relative risk (RR), 1.007; p < 0.05). BL CST was also a significant predictor for having persistent edema at M12 in subjects without vitreomacular adhesion (VMA) (> 80% probability of edema persistence at CST > 570 μm [RR, 1.006; p < 0.05]). However, in the presence of VMA, BL CST was no longer a significant predictor of having persistent edema at month 12 (RR, 1.005; p > 0.05).
    CONCLUSIONS: Subjects with high CST (> 570 μm) at baseline may not benefit from repeated intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF for resolution of edema.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Evaluation Study
    糖尿病患病率的增加以及针对其主要视觉威胁并发症(糖尿病性黄斑水肿[DME]和增生性糖尿病性视网膜病变[PDR])的新疗法的出现,这需要频繁的终身随访,医院需求明显增加。随后患者评估和治疗的延误导致视力丧失。迫切需要提高能力的战略。视网膜病变(EMERALD)研究测试了诊断准确性,可接受性,以及以前治疗过DME或PDR的人的新医疗保健途径的成本。
    预期,多中心,大小写引用,横截面,在英国13家医院进行的诊断准确性研究。
    先前成功治疗DME或PDR的1型或2型糖尿病成人,在入学时,患有活动性或非活动性疾病。
    涉及多模态成像的新医疗保健途径(DME的谱域OCT,和7场早期治疗糖尿病视网膜病变研究[ETDRS]和PDR的超宽场[UWF]眼底图像)由训练有素的非医务人员(眼科分级人员)解释以检测疾病的再激活,并与当前的标准护理(面对面)进行了比较。
    主要结果:新通路的敏感性。
    特异性;途径之间的一致性;成本;可接受性;需要后续眼科医生评估的比例,无法进行成像,图像不足或不确定的发现。
    新的途径显示出97%的敏感性(95%置信区间[CI],92%-99%)和31%(95%CI,23%-40%)的特异性来检测DME。对于PDR,使用7场ETDRS图像的敏感性和特异性(85%[95%CI,77%-91%]和48%[95%CI,41%-56%],分别)或UWF图像(83%[95%CI,75%-89%]和54%[95%CI,46%-61%],分别)具有可比性。为了检测高风险的PDR,使用UWF图像时的敏感性和特异性更高(87%[95%CI,78%-93%]和49%[95%CI,42%-56%],分别,UWF与80%[95%CI,69-88%]和40%[95%CI,34%-47%],分别,对于7场ETDRS图像)。参与者更喜欢眼科医生的评估;在他们缺席的情况下,他们更喜欢评分者的即时反馈,保持定期的眼科医生评估。与当前的护理标准相比,新路径每100例DME就诊可节省1390英镑,每100例PDR就诊可节省461至1189英镑.
    新的途径具有可接受的灵敏度并且将释放资源。用户建议应指导实施。
    The increasing diabetes prevalence and advent of new treatments for its major visual-threatening complications (diabetic macular edema [DME] and proliferative diabetic retinopathy [PDR]), which require frequent life-long follow-up, have increased hospital demands markedly. Subsequent delays in patient\'s evaluation and treatment are causing sight loss. Strategies to increase capacity are needed urgently. The retinopathy (EMERALD) study tested diagnostic accuracy, acceptability, and costs of a new health care pathway for people with previously treated DME or PDR.
    Prospective, multicenter, case-referent, cross-sectional, diagnostic accuracy study undertaken in 13 hospitals in the United Kingdom.
    Adults with type 1 or 2 diabetes previously successfully treated DME or PDR who, at the time of enrollment, had active or inactive disease.
    A new health care pathway entailing multimodal imaging (spectral-domain OCT for DME, and 7-field Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study [ETDRS] and ultra-widefield [UWF] fundus images for PDR) interpreted by trained nonmedical staff (ophthalmic graders) to detect reactivation of disease was compared with the current standard care (face-to-face examination by ophthalmologists).
    Primary outcome: sensitivity of the new pathway.
    specificity; agreement between pathways; costs; acceptability; proportions requiring subsequent ophthalmologist assessment, unable to undergo imaging, and with inadequate images or indeterminate findings.
    The new pathway showed sensitivity of 97% (95% confidence interval [CI], 92%-99%) and specificity of 31% (95% CI, 23%-40%) to detect DME. For PDR, sensitivity and specificity using 7-field ETDRS images (85% [95% CI, 77%-91%] and 48% [95% CI, 41%-56%], respectively) or UWF images (83% [95% CI, 75%-89%] and 54% [95% CI, 46%-61%], respectively) were comparable. For detection of high-risk PDR, sensitivity and specificity were higher when using UWF images (87% [95% CI, 78%-93%] and 49% [95% CI, 42%-56%], respectively, for UWF versus 80% [95% CI, 69-88%] and 40% [95% CI, 34%-47%], respectively, for 7-field ETDRS images). Participants preferred ophthalmologists\' assessments; in their absence, they preferred immediate feedback by graders, maintaining periodic ophthalmologist evaluations. When compared with the current standard of care, the new pathway could save £1390 per 100 DME visits and between £461 and £1189 per 100 PDR visits.
    The new pathway has acceptable sensitivity and would release resources. Users\' suggestions should guide implementation.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号