Abstract

Objective: intravitreal therapy for macular edema (ME) is a common clinical approach to treating most retinal vascular diseases; however, it generates high costs and requires multiple follow-up visits. Combining intravitreal anti–vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) or steroid therapy with subthreshold diode micropulse laser (SDM) application could potentially reduce the burden of numerous intravitreal injections. This review sought to explore whether this combination treatment is effective in the course of ME secondary to retinal vascular disease, and in particular, determine whether it is comparable or superior to intravitreal therapy alone. Materials and methods: the following terms and Boolean operators were used to search the PubMed literature database: subthreshold micropulse laser, subthreshold diode micropulse OR micropulse laser treatment AND anti-VEGF, anti-VEGF treatment, intravitreal steroids, OR combined therapy.This analysis included all studies discussing the combination of SDM and intravitreal anti-VEGF or steroid treatment. Results: the search revealed nine studies that met the inclusion criteria, including five comparing combined treatment and anti-VEGF treatment alone, four covering diabetic ME, and one covering ME secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion. All of these five studies suggested that combination therapy results in fewer intravitreal injections than anti-VEGF monotherapy with non-inferior functional and morphological outcomes. The remaining four studies report functional and morphological improvements after combined treatment; however, SDM alone was never superior to intravitreal-alone or combined treatment. There were substantial differences in treatment protocols and inclusion criteria between the studies. Conclusions: the available material was too scarce to provide a reliable assessment of the effects of combined therapy and its relation to intravitreal monotherapy in the treatment of ME secondary to retinal vascular disease. One assumption of note is that it is possible that SDM plus anti-VEGF might require fewer intravitreal injections than anti-VEGF monotherapy with equally good functional and morphological results. However, further randomized research is required to confirm this thesis.

Highlights

  • Subthreshold diode micropulse laser (SDM) therapy has been used extensively to treat retinal disorders in recent years [1,2]

  • Deterioration was much more frequent in noncompliant patients from the ranibizumab group than in those from the laser group. In light of this knowledge, the question of SDM application in retinal vascular diseases could be asked in a different way: is SDM capable of reducing the number of necessary intravitreal injections needed to maintain vision? The goal of this review was to analyze the effects of the combination of SDM and intravitreal injections in diabetic ME (DME) and macular edema (ME) secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO) based on the available literature

  • Patients subjected to combined therapy required fewer injections, especially when this number was compared with the number of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatments in the monotherapy population

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Subthreshold diode micropulse laser (SDM) therapy has been used extensively to treat retinal disorders in recent years [1,2]. The dense schedule of intravitreal therapy places a substantial burden on the patients, contrary to when undergoing laser treatment, which is performed less frequently This fact was proved by reviewing five years of results of the Protocol S study by the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network, which compared the efficacy of pan-retinal photocoagulation versus intravitreal ranibizumab for proliferative diabetic retinopathy [9]. Deterioration was much more frequent in noncompliant patients from the ranibizumab group than in those from the laser group In light of this knowledge, the question of SDM application in retinal vascular diseases could be asked in a different way: is SDM capable of reducing the number of necessary intravitreal injections needed to maintain vision? The present review seeks to find premises in which to use SDM as a supportive therapy that would reduce the number of necessary intravitreal injections

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (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