Intravitreal versus subtenon injection of triamcinolone acetonide for diabetic macular edema

Abstract

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the results of intravitreal injection with subtenon injection of triamcinolone in diabetic macular edema (DME).BackgroundTriamcinolone injection for DME.Patents and methodsThe study is a prospective randomized clinical trial including 80 eyes of patients with DME. Patients were divided into two groups: group I and group II. Group I (73.1% men and 26.9% women; mean age 55.7 ± 7.2 years) included 40 eyes that received 4 mg of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection. Group II (65.5% men and 34.5% women; mean age 55.8 ± 7.9 years) comprised 40 eyes that received 40 mg of subtenon triamcinolone acetonide injection. The patients were followed up after 1 week and 1, 3, and 6 months later to assess best-corrected visual acuity, intraocular pressure, and macular thickness. Fluorescein angiography and optical coherence tomography were used to evaluate the improvement.ResultsThere was a statistically significant difference between the studied groups at 1 week and 1 month (P < 0.05) and no significant difference at 3 and 6 months (P > 0.05) as regards their post-treatment outcome for visual acuity, and there was no statistically significant difference between the studied groups at 1 and 6 months (P > 0.05) as regards their post-treatment outcome for macular thickness.ConclusionBoth intravitreal and subtenon triamcinolone injections cause a significant increase in visual acuity; the effect is early and more pronounced in the intravitreal group but subtenon injection is safer.