Intravitreal Bevacizumab at 4-Month Intervals for Prevention of Macular Edema after Plaque Radiotherapy of Uveal Melanoma
Purpose To evaluate the efficacy of intravitreal bevacizumab for prevention of macular edema after plaque radiotherapy of uveal melanoma. Design Retrospective, single-center, nonrandomized, interventional comparative study. Participants Patients with uveal melanoma treated with plaque radiotherapy w...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.) Minn.), 2014, Vol.121 (1), p.269-275 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Purpose To evaluate the efficacy of intravitreal bevacizumab for prevention of macular edema after plaque radiotherapy of uveal melanoma. Design Retrospective, single-center, nonrandomized, interventional comparative study. Participants Patients with uveal melanoma treated with plaque radiotherapy were divided into 2 groups: a bevacizumab group and a control group. Intervention The bevacizumab group received intravitreal bevacizumab injection at the time of plaque removal and every 4 months thereafter for 2 years (total, 7 injections). The control group had no intravitreal bevacizumab injection. Both groups had periodic follow-up with ophthalmoscopy and optical coherence tomography (OCT). Main Outcome Measures Development of OCT-evident macular edema. Results There were 292 patients in the bevacizumab group and 126 in the control group. The median foveolar radiation dose was 4292 cGy (bevacizumab) and 4038 cGy (control; P = 0.327). The cumulative incidence of OCT-evident macular edema over 2 years (bevacizumab group vs. control group) was 26% versus 40% ( P = 0.004), respectively; that for clinically evident radiation maculopathy was 16% versus 31% ( P = 0.001), respectively; that for moderate vision loss was 33% versus 57% ( P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0161-6420 1549-4713 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.08.039 |