糖尿病黄斑水肿患者改用地塞米松治疗后,贝伐单抗良好应答者与无应答者的光学相干断层扫描生物标志物比较

Q3 Medicine
Jeong Hyun Lee, Joo Young Shin, Jeeyun Ahn
{"title":"糖尿病黄斑水肿患者改用地塞米松治疗后,贝伐单抗良好应答者与无应答者的光学相干断层扫描生物标志物比较","authors":"Jeong Hyun Lee,&nbsp;Joo Young Shin,&nbsp;Jeeyun Ahn","doi":"10.3341/kjo.2022.0109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare volumetric optical coherence tomography (OCT) biomarkers in bevacizumab responsive and bevacizumab refractory diabetic macular edema (DME) patients switched to the dexamethasone implant to ultimately identify possible prognostic indicators.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective analysis of DME patients treated with bevacizumab were done. Patients were divided into those who showed response to bevacizumab (bevacizumab only group) and others who were switched to the dexamethasone implant due to lack of response to bevacizumab (switching group). Volumetric OCT biomarkers such as central macular thickness (CMT), inner and outer cystoid macular edema (CME) volume, serous retinal detachment (SRD) volume, retinal volume (CME + SRD volume) within the 6-mm Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study circle were calculated. OCT biomarkers were followed up throughout treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among total of 144 eyes, 113 patients were included in the bevacizumab only group and 31 patients were included in the switching group. Compared to the bevacizumab only group, the switching group showed higher baseline CMT (558.00 ± 209.60 µm vs. 454.96 ± 125.88 µm, p = 0.003), larger inner CME (6.02 ± 1.43 mm3 vs. 5.12 ± 0.87 mm3, p = 0.004) and SRD volume (0.32 ± 0.40 mm3 vs. 0.11 ± 0.09 mm3, p = 0.015) and higher proportion of patients with SRD (58.06% vs. 31.86%, p = 0.008). In the switching group, CMT, inner CME and SRD volume all showed significant reduction after switching to the dexamethasone implant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>DME with large SRD and inner nuclear layer edema volume may be more effectively treated with the dexamethasone implant than bevacizumab.</p>","PeriodicalId":17883,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of Ophthalmology : KJO","volume":"37 2","pages":"137-146"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/8d/12/kjo-2022-0109.PMC10151166.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Optical Coherence Tomography Biomarkers between Bevacizumab Good Responders and Nonresponders Who were Switched to Dexamethasone Implant in Diabetic Macular Edema.\",\"authors\":\"Jeong Hyun Lee,&nbsp;Joo Young Shin,&nbsp;Jeeyun Ahn\",\"doi\":\"10.3341/kjo.2022.0109\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare volumetric optical coherence tomography (OCT) biomarkers in bevacizumab responsive and bevacizumab refractory diabetic macular edema (DME) patients switched to the dexamethasone implant to ultimately identify possible prognostic indicators.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective analysis of DME patients treated with bevacizumab were done. Patients were divided into those who showed response to bevacizumab (bevacizumab only group) and others who were switched to the dexamethasone implant due to lack of response to bevacizumab (switching group). Volumetric OCT biomarkers such as central macular thickness (CMT), inner and outer cystoid macular edema (CME) volume, serous retinal detachment (SRD) volume, retinal volume (CME + SRD volume) within the 6-mm Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study circle were calculated. OCT biomarkers were followed up throughout treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among total of 144 eyes, 113 patients were included in the bevacizumab only group and 31 patients were included in the switching group. Compared to the bevacizumab only group, the switching group showed higher baseline CMT (558.00 ± 209.60 µm vs. 454.96 ± 125.88 µm, p = 0.003), larger inner CME (6.02 ± 1.43 mm3 vs. 5.12 ± 0.87 mm3, p = 0.004) and SRD volume (0.32 ± 0.40 mm3 vs. 0.11 ± 0.09 mm3, p = 0.015) and higher proportion of patients with SRD (58.06% vs. 31.86%, p = 0.008). In the switching group, CMT, inner CME and SRD volume all showed significant reduction after switching to the dexamethasone implant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>DME with large SRD and inner nuclear layer edema volume may be more effectively treated with the dexamethasone implant than bevacizumab.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17883,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Korean Journal of Ophthalmology : KJO\",\"volume\":\"37 2\",\"pages\":\"137-146\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/8d/12/kjo-2022-0109.PMC10151166.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Korean Journal of Ophthalmology : KJO\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3341/kjo.2022.0109\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of Ophthalmology : KJO","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3341/kjo.2022.0109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较贝伐珠单抗应答和贝伐珠单抗难治性糖尿病黄斑水肿(DME)患者的体积光学相干断层扫描(OCT)生物标志物,以最终确定可能的预后指标。方法:对使用贝伐单抗治疗的二甲醚患者进行回顾性分析。患者被分为对贝伐单抗有反应的患者(仅贝伐单抗组)和由于对贝伐单抗缺乏反应而改用地塞米松植入物的患者(切换组)。计算6 mm早期糖尿病视网膜病变治疗研究圈内黄斑中央厚度(CMT)、内外囊状黄斑水肿(CME)体积、浆液性视网膜脱离(SRD)体积、视网膜体积(CME + SRD体积)等体积OCT生物标志物。在整个治疗过程中随访OCT生物标志物。结果:144只眼中,仅贝伐单抗组113例,切换组31例。与单一贝伐单抗组相比,切换组的基线CMT(558.00±209.60µm vs. 454.96±125.88µm, p = 0.003)、内CME(6.02±1.43 mm3 vs. 5.12±0.87 mm3, p = 0.004)和SRD体积(0.32±0.40 mm3 vs. 0.11±0.09 mm3, p = 0.015)更高,SRD患者比例(58.06% vs. 31.86%, p = 0.008)更高。切换组CMT、内CME和SRD体积均在切换到地塞米松种植体后显著降低。结论:与贝伐单抗相比,地塞米松植入物治疗SRD大、内核层水肿体积大的二甲醚可能更有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparison of Optical Coherence Tomography Biomarkers between Bevacizumab Good Responders and Nonresponders Who were Switched to Dexamethasone Implant in Diabetic Macular Edema.

Comparison of Optical Coherence Tomography Biomarkers between Bevacizumab Good Responders and Nonresponders Who were Switched to Dexamethasone Implant in Diabetic Macular Edema.

Comparison of Optical Coherence Tomography Biomarkers between Bevacizumab Good Responders and Nonresponders Who were Switched to Dexamethasone Implant in Diabetic Macular Edema.

Purpose: To compare volumetric optical coherence tomography (OCT) biomarkers in bevacizumab responsive and bevacizumab refractory diabetic macular edema (DME) patients switched to the dexamethasone implant to ultimately identify possible prognostic indicators.

Methods: Retrospective analysis of DME patients treated with bevacizumab were done. Patients were divided into those who showed response to bevacizumab (bevacizumab only group) and others who were switched to the dexamethasone implant due to lack of response to bevacizumab (switching group). Volumetric OCT biomarkers such as central macular thickness (CMT), inner and outer cystoid macular edema (CME) volume, serous retinal detachment (SRD) volume, retinal volume (CME + SRD volume) within the 6-mm Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study circle were calculated. OCT biomarkers were followed up throughout treatment.

Results: Among total of 144 eyes, 113 patients were included in the bevacizumab only group and 31 patients were included in the switching group. Compared to the bevacizumab only group, the switching group showed higher baseline CMT (558.00 ± 209.60 µm vs. 454.96 ± 125.88 µm, p = 0.003), larger inner CME (6.02 ± 1.43 mm3 vs. 5.12 ± 0.87 mm3, p = 0.004) and SRD volume (0.32 ± 0.40 mm3 vs. 0.11 ± 0.09 mm3, p = 0.015) and higher proportion of patients with SRD (58.06% vs. 31.86%, p = 0.008). In the switching group, CMT, inner CME and SRD volume all showed significant reduction after switching to the dexamethasone implant.

Conclusions: DME with large SRD and inner nuclear layer edema volume may be more effectively treated with the dexamethasone implant than bevacizumab.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Korean Journal of Ophthalmology : KJO
Korean Journal of Ophthalmology : KJO Medicine-Ophthalmology
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
84
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信