Abstract
Retinal vein occlusions are the second most common form of retinal vascular disease. Previously, laser treatment for branch retinal vein occlusion and intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide for central retinal vein occlusion were the standard of care. Recent studies have demonstrated that anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents have a superior safety and efficacy profile for the treatment of both branch and central retinal vein occlusions. The use of wide-field fluorescein angiography has also allowed better visualization of the retinal periphery. Despite the better documentation of retinal non-perfusion, laser photocoagulation to the areas of non-perfusion does not seem to result in a reduction of macular edema or reduction in treatment burden and has been relegated to patients who develop rubeosis or neovascularization of the retina. More recently, several studies have demonstrated the use of a long-acting dexamethasone implant administered intravitreally or triamcinolone administered in the suprachoroidal space as a viable approach to treat retinal vein occlusion.
Highlights
Retinal vascular occlusions are the second most common form of retinal vascular disease after diabetic retinopathy[1]
Retinal vein occlusions (RVOs) can be classified as ischemic and non-ischemic occlusions, depending on the degree of non-perfusion based on the fluorescein angiogram[2]
central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) usually occurs from a thrombus in the central retinal vein at the level of the lamina cribrosa in the optic nerve[3]
Summary
Retinal vascular occlusions are the second most common form of retinal vascular disease after diabetic retinopathy[1]. Retinal Vein Occlusion with VEGF Trap-Eye (GALILEO) studies both evaluated the use of aflibercept in the treatment of macular edema from CRVO. In both studies, over 50% of treated eyes compared with 12% of control eyes gained three lines of vision[45,46]. A study by Singer et al showed that combination therapy with an anti-VEGF agent and dexamethasone implant led to a mean re-injection interval of 135 ± 36.4 days for patients with macular edema secondary to CRVO and BRVO as well as improvements in visual acuity and central foveal thickness[55]. Grant information The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
