Abstract
BackgroundPanretinal photocoagulation treatment (PRP) have been known as a standard treatment for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) or severe nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (sNPDR). However, there is no consensus on when PRP should be administrated if anti-VEGF treatment is needed for the concurrent diabetic macular edema (DME). This study is to evaluate the difference between two groups of PRP prior to, or after intravitreal conbercept (IVC) for patients with PDR or sNPDR combined with DME.MethodsThis was a retrospective study. Fifty-eight eyes with DME secondary to PDR or sNPDR were divided into two groups; the PRP after (PRP-after group), or prior to (PRP-prior group), IVC. Changes in number of IVC injections, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and central subfield macular thickness (CSMT) were compared after 4 weeks, 12 weeks, 1 year, and 2 years from the first IVC injection.ResultsThe mean number of injections in PRP-after group was 4.8 (1 year) and 6.4 (2 year), lower than 6.4 (1 year) and 8.5 (2 year) in PRP-prior group (both p = 0.002). There was no significant difference in change in BCVA and CSMT between two groups after each follow-up.ConclusionPRP after IVC requires less injections but also yields similar visual and anatomic outcome comparing with PRP prior to IVC in patients with diabetic retinopathy combined with DME.
Highlights
Panretinal photocoagulation treatment (PRP) have been known as a standard treatment for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) or severe nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy
During the past three decades, panretinal photocoagulation treatment (PRP) has been standard for patients with PDR [2, 3], and the emerging adjunctive anti-VEGF agents have shown superior outcomes, especially for DEM secondary to PDR or non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) [4,5,6,7,8]
Results of the present study suggest that both treatment regime (PRP prior to, or after intravitreal conbercept (IVC)) are associated with significant regression of diabetic macular edema (DME) and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improvement in patients with DEM secondary to severe NPDR or PDR
Summary
Panretinal photocoagulation treatment (PRP) have been known as a standard treatment for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) or severe nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (sNPDR). There is no consensus on when PRP should be administrated if anti-VEGF treatment is needed for the concurrent diabetic macular edema (DME). During the past three decades, panretinal photocoagulation treatment (PRP) has been standard for patients with PDR [2, 3], and the emerging adjunctive anti-VEGF agents have shown superior outcomes, especially for DEM secondary to PDR or NPDR [4,5,6,7,8]. PRP may aggravate macular edema due to retinal inflammation and increased vascular permeability [13], it is unknown whether this PRP-induced macular damage is temporary or permanent
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
