Evaluation of diabetic macular edema by using optical coherence tomography in patients underwent combined phacoemulsification and intravitreal ranibizumab injection versus patients underwent sequential intravitreal ranibizumab injection and phacoemulsification: an observational study
Purpose To compare combined phacoemulsification and intravitreal Ranibizumab (RBZ) injection versus sequential Intravitreal Raibizumab injection and phacoemulsification on the progression of diabetic macular edema (DME) both clinically (through best corrected visual acuity) and by optical coherence...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of Egyptian ophthalmological society 2023-07, Vol.116 (3), p.188-192 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Purpose To compare combined phacoemulsification and intravitreal Ranibizumab (RBZ) injection versus sequential Intravitreal Raibizumab injection and phacoemulsification on the progression of diabetic macular edema (DME) both clinically (through best corrected visual acuity) and by optical coherence tomography (OCT).
Setting and design This observational study was conducted in October 6 University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Ophthalmology.
Patient and methods Patients with non-ischemic diabetic macular edema (DME); along with, clinically significant cataract were randomly divided into two groups. Both groups received three intravitreal 0.5 mg/0.05 ml RBZ injections on monthly basis. Group (I), received the first dose combined with phacoemulsification followed by the other two injections, one and two months postoperatively. Group (II), received the first dose two weeks before phacoemulsification followed by the other two injections, one and two months from the first one.
Results The baseline mean central macular thickness (CMT) was comparable in both groups (P>0.05); however, the CMT one month after the third injection was 261±36 µm for Group (II) vs 320±65 µm for Group (I), which was statistically significant (P0.05); however, the mean BCVA at the end of follow-up was 0.32±0.23 LogMAR for Group (II) vs 0.50±0.19 LogMAR for Group (I), which was statistically significant (P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2090-0686 2314-6648 |
DOI: | 10.4103/ejos.ejos_40_23 |