{"title":"玻璃体内地塞米松植入剂(Ozurdex)与布鲁珠单抗注射液治疗伴有高反光视网膜内点的糖尿病性黄斑水肿的比较分析:一项回顾性研究。","authors":"Somnath Chakraborty, Jay Umed Sheth","doi":"10.2147/OPTH.S484731","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This retrospective study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant (DEX) and Brolucizumab Injection in treating Diabetic Macular Edema (DME) with Hyperreflective Intraretinal Dots (HRID).</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>A single-center retrospective study in India included 40 eyes (20 per group) with controlled diabetes and HRID on optical coherence tomography. Patients received either DEX or Brolucizumab, with outcomes assessed at various intervals up to 24 weeks. Primary measures included Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA), Central Macular Thickness (CMT), and safety parameters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both treatment groups demonstrated comparable baseline characteristics. Both treatments significantly improved the BCVA at weeks 4, 12, and 24, with the DEX implant showing significantly better results at week 12 than brolucizumab (<i>P</i>=0.04). In treatment-naïve eyes, BCVA improvements were similar across all time points. In recalcitrant DME eyes, DEX showed significant BCVA improvements at all time points, while brolucizumab showed significant improvements only at weeks 4 (<i>P</i>=0.005) and 24 (<i>P</i>=0.04). The CMT also improved with both treatments, with DEX showing superior reduction at weeks 4 (<i>P</i>=0.003), 12 (<i>P</i>=0.003), and 24 (<i>P</i>=0.002) respectively. In treatment-naïve eyes, DEX showed consistently better CMT reductions. In refractory DME eyes, both treatments significantly reduced CMT, with DEX performing better at week 12 (<i>P</i>=0.042). DEX required fewer injections (DEX: 1.5±0.61; brolucizumab: 2.4±0.82; <i>P</i>=0.0002) and less supplementary laser treatment (DEX:8/20, 40% eyes; brolucizumab: 16/20, 80%; <i>P</i>=0.01) compared to brolucizumab. No adverse events were observed in either group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study suggests the potential superiority of intravitreal DEX implant over brolucizumab in managing DME with HRID. DEX exhibited sustained positive responses in BCVA and CMT, requiring fewer injections and supplementary interventions. Future research should explore extended follow-up durations, personalized treatment strategies, and refined biomarkers to optimize DME management.</p>","PeriodicalId":93945,"journal":{"name":"Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11490259/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Analysis of Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant (Ozurdex) and Brolucizumab Injection in the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema with Hyperreflective Intraretinal Dots: A Retrospective Study.\",\"authors\":\"Somnath Chakraborty, Jay Umed Sheth\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/OPTH.S484731\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This retrospective study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant (DEX) and Brolucizumab Injection in treating Diabetic Macular Edema (DME) with Hyperreflective Intraretinal Dots (HRID).</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>A single-center retrospective study in India included 40 eyes (20 per group) with controlled diabetes and HRID on optical coherence tomography. Patients received either DEX or Brolucizumab, with outcomes assessed at various intervals up to 24 weeks. Primary measures included Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA), Central Macular Thickness (CMT), and safety parameters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both treatment groups demonstrated comparable baseline characteristics. Both treatments significantly improved the BCVA at weeks 4, 12, and 24, with the DEX implant showing significantly better results at week 12 than brolucizumab (<i>P</i>=0.04). In treatment-naïve eyes, BCVA improvements were similar across all time points. In recalcitrant DME eyes, DEX showed significant BCVA improvements at all time points, while brolucizumab showed significant improvements only at weeks 4 (<i>P</i>=0.005) and 24 (<i>P</i>=0.04). The CMT also improved with both treatments, with DEX showing superior reduction at weeks 4 (<i>P</i>=0.003), 12 (<i>P</i>=0.003), and 24 (<i>P</i>=0.002) respectively. In treatment-naïve eyes, DEX showed consistently better CMT reductions. In refractory DME eyes, both treatments significantly reduced CMT, with DEX performing better at week 12 (<i>P</i>=0.042). DEX required fewer injections (DEX: 1.5±0.61; brolucizumab: 2.4±0.82; <i>P</i>=0.0002) and less supplementary laser treatment (DEX:8/20, 40% eyes; brolucizumab: 16/20, 80%; <i>P</i>=0.01) compared to brolucizumab. No adverse events were observed in either group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study suggests the potential superiority of intravitreal DEX implant over brolucizumab in managing DME with HRID. DEX exhibited sustained positive responses in BCVA and CMT, requiring fewer injections and supplementary interventions. Future research should explore extended follow-up durations, personalized treatment strategies, and refined biomarkers to optimize DME management.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11490259/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S484731\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S484731","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative Analysis of Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant (Ozurdex) and Brolucizumab Injection in the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema with Hyperreflective Intraretinal Dots: A Retrospective Study.
Purpose: This retrospective study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant (DEX) and Brolucizumab Injection in treating Diabetic Macular Edema (DME) with Hyperreflective Intraretinal Dots (HRID).
Patients and methods: A single-center retrospective study in India included 40 eyes (20 per group) with controlled diabetes and HRID on optical coherence tomography. Patients received either DEX or Brolucizumab, with outcomes assessed at various intervals up to 24 weeks. Primary measures included Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA), Central Macular Thickness (CMT), and safety parameters.
Results: Both treatment groups demonstrated comparable baseline characteristics. Both treatments significantly improved the BCVA at weeks 4, 12, and 24, with the DEX implant showing significantly better results at week 12 than brolucizumab (P=0.04). In treatment-naïve eyes, BCVA improvements were similar across all time points. In recalcitrant DME eyes, DEX showed significant BCVA improvements at all time points, while brolucizumab showed significant improvements only at weeks 4 (P=0.005) and 24 (P=0.04). The CMT also improved with both treatments, with DEX showing superior reduction at weeks 4 (P=0.003), 12 (P=0.003), and 24 (P=0.002) respectively. In treatment-naïve eyes, DEX showed consistently better CMT reductions. In refractory DME eyes, both treatments significantly reduced CMT, with DEX performing better at week 12 (P=0.042). DEX required fewer injections (DEX: 1.5±0.61; brolucizumab: 2.4±0.82; P=0.0002) and less supplementary laser treatment (DEX:8/20, 40% eyes; brolucizumab: 16/20, 80%; P=0.01) compared to brolucizumab. No adverse events were observed in either group.
Conclusion: The study suggests the potential superiority of intravitreal DEX implant over brolucizumab in managing DME with HRID. DEX exhibited sustained positive responses in BCVA and CMT, requiring fewer injections and supplementary interventions. Future research should explore extended follow-up durations, personalized treatment strategies, and refined biomarkers to optimize DME management.