Triamcinolone For Diabetic Macular Edema Research Articles

Role of Suprachoroidal versus Intravitreal injection of triamcinolone: In diabetic macular edema.

Objective: To assess the efficacy of suprachoroidal versus intravitreal injection of triamcinolone in diabetic macular edema. Study Design: Randomized Controlled Trial. Setting: Department of Ophthalmology, Ziauddin Hospital Kemari, Karachi. Period: 1st November 2022 and 30th October 2023. Methods: The study observed 71 eyes of 59 patients diagnosed with Diabetic macular edema. All patients that met the inclusion criteria were divided into two groups, Group A Suprachoroidal Triamcinolone and Group B Intravitreal Triamcinolone. Results: This research encompasses 71 eyes from 59 patients diagnosed with diabetic macular edema, divided into two groups based on their chosen treatment. Group A consisted of 34 patients, whereas Group B comprised 37 patients. The average age of patients in both groups was 43.6±6.2. Baseline visual acuity and macular thickness were recorded in both groups and compared after treatment. Significant improvement was observed in both groups, particularly notable in the 3rd month. The suprachoroidal triamcinolone injection exhibited a more stable response, accompanied by lower complication rate. Conclusion: In conclusion, the comparative analysis of Suprachoroidal Triamcinolone acetate and Intravitreal Triamcinolone Acetate showed a more significant improvement in IOP and CMT in the suprachoroidal group as compared to intravitreal. Hence Suprachoroidal injection was seen as the treatment of choice in treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema.

Evolution of Intravitreal Therapy for Retinal Diseases—From CMV to CNV: The LXXIV Edward Jackson Memorial Lecture

To present the evolution of intravitreal therapy for retinal diseases and its impact on clinical practice. Retrospective literature review and personal perspective. Retrospective literature review and personal perspective. Pharmacotherapeutic advances in retinal disease have been remarkable over the last 25 years. Almost all of the new drugs developed have required intravitreal administration to be highly effective, leading to an exponential increase in the annual number of intravitreal injections given. The use of intravitreal antibiotic injections to treat endophthalmitis, usually on a one-time basis, first familiarized ophthalmologists with this method of drug delivery. Ganciclovir was the first widely available, relatively inexpensive compounded drug that was used for repeat intravitreal injection to treat a chronic retinal disease, followed by triamcinolone for diabetic macular edema and bevacizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Ganciclovir was formulated for sustained-release drug delivery to avoid frequent intravitreal injections, a goal that has been more elusive for anti-VEGF drugs. Political obstacles encountered while conducting some of the trials to evaluate these treatments were substantial. Addressing the issues they raised led to important national policy changes that will impact the conduct of future clinical trials. The first comparative efficacy trial of intravitreal therapies was the Comparison of AMD Treatments Trials (CATT). The primary results from CATT and the many publications that followed continue to shape the use of intravitreal therapy today. Intravitreal therapy has proven highly effective for the treatment of many retinal diseases. The treatment burden for patients from numerous injections, the cost to health care systems, and the impact on workflows in clinical practice have been substantial. Efforts to develop effective intravitreal therapies with reduced treatment burden and cost are ongoing.

Real-World Results of Intravitreal Ranibizumab, Bevacizumab, or Triamcinolone for Diabetic Macular Edema

Objective: To compare the visual and anatomical outcomes of intravitreal ranibizumab (group 1), bevacizumab (group 2), and triamcinolone (group 3) for center-involving diabetic macular edema. Methods: We retrospectively enrolled 275 eyes of 208 consecutive patients. Visual acuity (VA) in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters and central macular thickness (CMT) values on optical coherence tomography were extracted. Reported side effects were noted. Results: At 6 months, the mean changes in VA in group 1, group 2, and group 3 were +4.9, +4.3, and +4.6 letters, respectively (p = 0.911). Improvement of CMT at 6 and 24 months was significantly better in group 3 compared to groups 1 and 2 (p = 0.012 and p = 0.001, respectively). At 24 months, the only independent variable affecting the change in VA was initial VA (p = 0.020). Cataract and glaucoma prevalences were higher in group 3 (p = 0.000 and p = 0.001, respectively). Conclusions: Three treatment methods had similar effects with regard to improvement in VA; however, intravitreal triamcinolone provided additional anatomical improvement.

Vessel diameter study: intravitreal vs posterior subtenon triamcinolone acetonide injection for diabetic macular edema.

PurposeTo detect and compare the vessel diameter effect of intravitreal vs subtenon injection of triamcinolone for diabetic macular edema (DME).MethodsSixty patients with DME who underwent triamcinolone injection either intravitreally (N=30) or under the tenon capsule (N=30) were included. Non-injected fellow eyes served as control. The main outcome measures were central retinal artery equivalent (CRAE), central retinal vein equivalent (CRVE), and artery-vein ratio (AVR).ResultsIn the intravitreal group, pre-injection mean CRAE (147.07 μ) decreased to 141.03 μ at 1 week and to 139.43 μ at 1 month (P<0.001) while baseline CRVE (209.61 μ) decreased initially to 198.85 μ at 1 week then to 198.49 μ at 1 month (P<0.001). In the subtenon group, pre-injection CRAE (152.18 μ) decreased to 149.49 μ at 1 week and to 147.47 μ at 1 month (P=0.017), while baseline CRVE (215.60 μ) decreased initially to 208.69 μ at 1 week then to 207.25 μ at 1 month (P=0.003). Pre-injection AVR values did not change at 1 week and at 1 month in both injection groups (P=0.66 and P=0.196, respectively). In the control group, none of the 3 parameters changed throughout the study period compared to the baseline (P>0.28).ConclusionIn eyes with DME, both intravitreal and subtenon triamcinolone injection led to a significant constriction of retinal arteries and veins.

Experience of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide for treatment of diabetic macular edema among Omani population.

PURPOSE:The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of intravitreal (IVT) triamcinolone in diabetic macular edema (DME).MATERIALS AND METHODS:A retrospective study of 42 eyes diagnosed clinically and supported with optical coherence tomography (OCT), with DME of more than 300 μm in thickness. All eyes were injected with a single IVT injection of preservative free triamcinolone acetonide (TA) with dose of 4 mg. Patients were subjected to visual acuity (VA) and OCT on each follow-up visit which was continued for 6 months. The total number of IVT injections given was 48. Six eyes had a repeat injection. None of the eyes had any other IVT injection within 6 weeks of TA. Twenty-one eyes were pseudophakic.RESULTS:Mean age of the patients was 58.8 years. The mean central subfield thickness (CST) at baseline was 504.6 μm. At 6 weeks, the mean CST dropped by 183.6 μm (P < 0.00001). At 6-month follow-up, the mean CST had increased by 74.6 μm from 6 weeks level; however, the 6-month mean CST was 109 μ less than mean baseline thickness (P < 0.0005). The mean baseline VA was 0.80 LogMAR units. At 6 weeks, the mean VA dropped by 0.01 LogMAR. At 6 months, VA improved by 0.02 LogMAR units from baseline. Overall, VA improved in 47% eyes, dropped from baseline in 35% eyes, and remained unchanged in 18% eyes.CONCLUSION:Triamcinolone acetonide is a safe, effective, and promising therapy in DME.

Vessel diameter study: intravitreal versus posterior subtenon triamcinolone acetonide injection for diabetic macular edema

PurposeTo detect and compare the vessel diameter effect of intravitreal versus subtenon injection of triamcinolone for diabetic macular edema (DME).MethodsSixty patients with DME who underwent triamcinolone injection either intravitreally (N = 30) or under the tenon capsule (N = 30) were included. Non‐injected fellow eyes served as control. The main outcome measures were central retinal artery equivalent (CRAE), central retinal vein equivalent (CRVE), and artery‐vein ratio (AVR).ResultsIn the intravitreal group, pre‐injection mean CRAE (147.07μ) decreased to 141.03 μ at 1 week and to 139.43 μ at 1 month (p &lt; 0.001) while baseline CRVE (209.61 μ) decreased initially to 198.85 μ at 1 week then to 198.49 μ at 1 month (p &lt; 0.001). In the subtenon group, pre‐injection CRAE (152.18 μ) decreased to 149.49 μ at 1 week and to 147.47 μ at 1 month (p = 0.017) while baseline CRVE (215.60 μ) decreased initially to 208.69 μ at 1 week then to 207.25 μ at 1 month (p = 0.003). Pre‐injection AVR values did not change at 1 week and at 1 month in both injection groups (p = 0.66 and p = 0.196, respectively). In the control group, none of the 3 parameters changed throughout the study period compared to the baseline (p &gt; 0.28).ConclusionsIn eyes with DME, both intravitreal and subtenon triamcinolone injection led to a significant constriction of retinal arteries and veins

Intravitreal versus subtenon injection of triamcinolone acetonide for diabetic macular edema

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.

Comparison of Intravitreal Bevacizumab Alone or Combined with Triamcinolone versus Triamcinolone in Diabetic Macular Edema: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Purpose: To compare the effect of an intravitreal injection of bevacizumab alone (IVB) or combined with triamcinolone (IVB/IVT) versus triamcinolone (IVT) in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). Methods: In this randomized three-arm clinical trial, eligible eyes were assigned randomly to one of the three study arms: the IVB group, 2 injections of 1.25 mg of bevacizumab with 6-week intervals; the IVB/IVT group, 1.25 mg of IVB with 2 mg of IVT, and the IVT group, 2 mg of IVT. The clinical course of best-corrected visual acuity and central macular thickness by optical coherence tomography was monitored for up to 12 months after the initial injection. Results: One hundred eleven eyes of 105 patients with DME completed 12 months of follow-up. The IVB/IVT group and the IVT group showed better visual acuity and reduced central macular thickness at 6 weeks and 3 months, compared with the IVB group (p = 0.041, p = 0.02 at 6 weeks; p = 0.045, p = 0.043 at 3 months, respectively). However, no significant difference in visual acuity and central macular thickness was observed between the three groups at 12 months (p = 0.088, p = 0.132, respectively). The frequency of retreatment was lower in the IVB/IVT and IVT groups during the 12-month period (p < 0.001). No significant differences in visual acuity or central macular thickness were observed between the IVB/IVT and IVT groups during the follow-up. Conclusion: IVB/IVT and IVT showed more pronounced effects during the earlier postinjection period. However, levels of visual acuity or central macular thickness at 12 months were comparable in the three study groups. No beneficial effect of the combination injection was observed.

Comparative study of vitrectomy versus intravitreous triamcinolone for diabetic macular edema on randomized paired-eyes

The present study was performed to compare the effects of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) and single intravitreaous triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) on diabetic macular edema (DME) in paired eyes. Prospective comparative study on randomized paired-eyes was carried out at two hospitals. Forty eyes of 20 patients with bilateral DME were included. One randomly-selected eye was treated with PPV (PPV group), and the other eye was treated with IVTA (4 mg, IVTA group). The central macular thickness (CMT) measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT) and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were monitored for 12 months after treatment. Changes from baseline and differences between groups were analyzed using a mixed model. At 1 and 3 months, CMT decreased significantly in the IVTA group compared to baseline (p < 0.0001 both), but CMT then increased gradually and no significant difference was found at 12 months (p = 0.90). In the PPV group, CMT decreased continuously and reached a significant level at 12 months (p < 0.0001). CMT of the IVTA group was significantly less than that of the PPV group at 1 month (p = 0.009); however, there was no significant difference at 3 months. Conversely, CMT was significantly less in the PPV group than in the IVTA group at 12 months (p = 0.0003). The changes of BCVA paralleled those of CMT, but no significant difference was detected between baseline BCVA and any time point. Despite the short-term improvement, DME recurred 6 months after IVTA, while it remained resolved after PPV. Although this study did not reveal a significant change of BCVA with either treatment, PPV resolved DME more effectively than IVTA at 1 year.

Comparison of efficacy and safety between intraocular becacizumab and triamcinolone for diabetic macular edema

Background Diabetic macular edema is the primary complication of diabetes.Becacizumab and triamcinolone acetonide(TA) have been intravitreally used to treat diabetic macular edema,but it is necessary to compare and evaluate their efficacy and safety.Objective The aim of this trial was to discuss and compare the safety and efficacy of intravitreal injection of becacizumab and TA for diabetic macular edema.Methods A case-controlled study was designed.In this pilot clinical trial,total 98 eyes of 98 patients determined as diabetic macular edema by optical coherence tomography(OCT) and fluorescine funds angiography(FFA) were assigned to becacizumab group and TA group according to the visiting time.Becacizumab of 0.05ml(1.25mg) was injected into vitreous via 4mm posterior to limbus in becacizumab group and TA of 0.1ml(4mg) was used at the same way.The visual acuity,central macular thickness(CMT) and intraocular pressure(IOP) were examined before and 4,8,12 weeks after injection.The complication after injection was compared between these two groups.This study was approved by Ethic Committee of Xi'an Central Hospital.Written informed consent was obtained from each patient prior to this protocol.Results All of the patients finished the medical procedure and follow-up.No significant differences were found in the demographic characteristics between two groups(P＞0.05).The vision was obviously improved in both becacizumab group and TA group in 4,8,12 weeks after injection in comparison with before injection(P＜0.01),but no evident differences were seen in vision at various time points between two groups (P＞0.05).The CMT values were reduced after injection compared with before injection in both two groups(P＜0.01),however,there was no any difference was found in CMT value between becacizumab group and TA group whatever before and after injection(P＞0.05).In 4,8,12 weeks after intravitreous injection,the IOPs were elevated in TA group compared with becacizumab group(P＜0.05,P＜0.01),and the IOP was higher after injection than that before injection in TA group(P＜0.01).The incidence of increased IOP after intravitreal injection of TA was 14.3%.No complication was observed in becacizumab group during the follow-up duration.Conclusion Both becacizumab and TA can treat diabetic macular edema by intravitreal administration.Intravitreal injection of TA may be the more favorable therapy for diabetic macular edema in comparison with becacizumab.However,this outcome indicate that IOP should be monitored during the follow-up period. Key words: Becacizumab; Triamcinolone acetonide; Diabetes; Macular edema; Intravitreal injection; Intraocular pressure

Geographic pattern of central retinal sensitivity after intravitreal triamcinolone for diabetic macular edema

Geographic pattern of central retinal sensitivity after intravitreal triamcinolone for diabetic macular edema

Geographic pattern of central retinal sensitivity after intravitreal triamcinolone for diabetic macular edema

Geographic pattern of central retinal sensitivity after intravitreal triamcinolone for diabetic macular edema

Geographic pattern of central retinal sensitivity after intravitreal triamcinolone for diabetic macular edema

To evaluate the geographic pattern of central retinal sensitivity and its resolution shortly after intravitreal injection of triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) for diabetic macular edema (DME). Twenty eyes of 20 patients who underwent IVTA for the treatment of DME were reviewed retrospectively. Early changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), photoreceptor inner and outer segments (IS/OS) line and central retinal sensitivity were analyzed. Retinal sensitivity was measured at 40 points within the central 10 degrees of the macula with the Micro Perimeter 1 before treatment, and at 1 week and 1 month after IVTA. Mean BCVA and CMT improved significantly at 1 week and 1 month after IVTA. Mean retinal sensitivity, however, showed no significant improvement at 1 week (P = 0.238), but did show significant improvement at 1 month (P = 0.0003). Mean retinal sensitivity of the points at the central 2 degrees, which was significantly lower than that at 6 and 10 degrees before treatment, showed improvement similar to those of 6 and 10 degrees after IVTA. Mean retinal sensitivity in the nasal quadrant of the macular area had the best sensitivity at all time points, and improved more than it did in the other quadrants. Mean retinal sensitivity in the central 2 degrees was better in the eyes with complete IS/OS line (P < 0.0001). BCVA and CMT improved significantly after IVTA for DME. Retinal sensitivity also showed significant, albeit relatively slow, improvement. The nasal quadrant of the macular area showed more improvement than did any other quadrant.

Three-Year Follow-up of a Randomized Trial Comparing Focal/Grid Photocoagulation and Intravitreal Triamcinolone for Diabetic Macular Edema

Three-Year Follow-up of a Randomized Trial Comparing Focal/Grid Photocoagulation and Intravitreal Triamcinolone for Diabetic Macular Edema

Three-Year Follow-up of a Randomized Trial Comparing Focal/Grid Photocoagulation and Intravitreal Triamcinolone for Diabetic Macular Edema

To report 3-year outcomes of patients who participated in a randomized trial evaluating 1-mg and 4-mg doses of preservative-free intravitreal triamcinolone compared with focal/grid photocoagulation for treatment of diabetic macular edema. Eyes with diabetic macular edema and visual acuities of 20/40 to 20/320 were randomly assigned to focal/grid photocoagulation or 1 mg or 4 mg of triamcinolone. At the conclusion of the trial, 3-year follow-up data were available in 306 eyes. Between 2 years (time of the primary outcome) and 3 years, more eyes improved than worsened in all 3 treatment groups. Change in visual acuity letter score from baseline to 3 years was +5 in the laser group and 0 in each triamcinolone group. The cumulative probability of cataract surgery by 3 years was 31%, 46%, and 83% in the laser and 1-mg and 4-mg triamcinolone groups, respectively. Intraocular pressure increased by more than 10 mm Hg at any visit in 4%, 18%, and 33% of eyes, respectively. Results in a subset of randomized subjects who completed the 3-year follow-up are consistent with previously published 2-year results and do not indicate a long-term benefit of intravitreal triamcinolone relative to focal/grid photocoagulation in patients with diabetic macular edema similar to those studied in this clinical trial. Most eyes receiving 4 mg of triamcinolone as given in this study are likely to require cataract surgery. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00367133.

Comparison of Photocoagulation With Combined Intravitreal Triamcinolone for Diabetic Macular Edema

PurposeTo compare the efficacy between macular laser grid (MLG) photocoagulation and MLG plus intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA; MLG+IVTA) therapy in diabetic macular edema (DME) patients.MethodsA prospective, randomized, clinical trial was conducted of DME patients. A total of 60 eyes (54 patients) affected by DME were observed for a minimum of 6 months. Thirty eyes of 28 patients who received MLG treatment and 30 eyes of 26 patients who received the combined MLG+IVTA treatment were included in the study. Main outcome measures were BCVA and central macular thickness (CMT) as measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT) at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment. Additionally, the authors examined retrospectively 20 eyes of 20 patients who were treated with only IVTA and compared with the 2 groups (MLG group and MLG+IVTA group).ResultsBaseline BCVA was 0.53±0.32 and CMT was 513.9±55.1 µm in the MLG group. At 1 and 3 months after treatment, the MLG group showed no significant improvement of BCVA and CMT, although there was significant improvement after 6 months. In the MLG+IVTA group, the baseline BCVA was 0.59±0.29 and CMT was 498.2±19.8 µm. After treatment, significant improvement of BCVA and CMT was observed at all follow-up time periods. When comparing the MLG group with the MLG+IVTA group, the latter had better results after 1 and 3 months, although at 6 months, there was no significant difference of BCVA and CMT between the 2 groups. Additionally, the IVTA group showed more improvement than the MLG group at 1 and 3 months but showed no significant difference at 6 months. In addition, the IVTA group showed no significant difference with the MLG+IVTA group at all follow-up time periods.ConclusionsFor DME patients, the combined MLG+IVTA treatment had a better therapeutic effect than the MLG treatment for improving BCVA and CMT at the early follow-up time periods. IVTA treatment alone could be an additional alternative therapeutic option to combined therapy.

Optical Coherence Tomographic Pattern May Predict Visual Outcome after Intravitreal Triamcinolone for Diabetic Macular Edema

To identify an optical coherence tomography (OCT) pattern predictive of visual outcome in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) who underwent a single dose of intravitreal triamcinolone. Retrospective case analysis with prospective data collection for controls. Ninety-three cases and 25 controls. Two independent masked observers retrospectively examined preoperative macular OCTs of 93 eyes of 93 patients who were given a single dose (4 mg in 0.1 ml) of intravitreal triamcinolone for DME and categorized them as belonging to 2 groups: 1, comprised of eyes with high reflectivity (bright colors) from inner retinal layers, and 2, comprised of eyes that had low reflectivity (darker colors) from inner retinal layers. Logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution visual acuity (VA) and macular thickness measured by OCT were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively at 1 and 3 months. Optical coherence tomographic appearance of inner retinal layers. All patients completed 3 months of follow-up. In group 1, 45 of 51 eyes (88%) experienced visual improvement of > or =2 lines on an Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at 1 month of follow-up. Forty-four of 51 patients (86%) experienced visual improvement of > or =2 lines on an ETDRS chart at 3 months of follow-up. In group 2, 18 of 42 patients (43%) experienced visual improvement of > or =1 lines on an ETDRS chart at 1 and 3 months of follow-up. For the remaining patients, VA remained unchanged during the postoperative course of 3 months. Patients in whom OCT demonstrated the high reflectivity of inner retinal layers achieved greater VA though macular thickness decreased significantly after intravitreal triamcinolone in both groups. It may be hypothesized that a lower optical reflectivity of inner retinal layers is related to the atrophy of the inner retinal layers, thus resulting in a failure of VA recovery in these patients. The level of reflectivity from inner retinal layers on OCT may provide objective criteria in predicting the response of DME to intravitreal triamcinolone and help in preoperative counseling of patients with DME.

Intravitreal Triamcinolone in Diabetic Macular Edema—Reply

Intravitreal Triamcinolone in Diabetic Macular Edema—Reply

Intravitreal triamcinolone for diabetic macular edema that persists after laser treatment: Three-monthefficacy and safety results of a prospective, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled clinical trial

To determine whether an intravitreal injection of triamcinolone acetonide for persistent diabetic macular edema after adequate laser treatment improves visual acuity. Prospective, double-masked, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial. Sixty-nine eyes of 43 patients were entered into the study, with 34 eyes randomized to receive active treatment and 35 randomized to receive a placebo injection. Sixty-five of 69 eyes (94%) completed the 3-month study visit. Using a 27-gauge needle, 0.1 ml of triamcinolone acetonide was injected through the pars plana. The procedure was performed in a minor procedures area in the outpatient clinic under sterile conditions and using topical and subconjunctival anesthesia. Eyes randomized to placebo received a subconjunctival saline injection using the identical procedure for preparation. The main outcome measures were improvement of best-corrected logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution visual acuity by 5 or more letters and incidence of moderate or severe adverse events. Eighteen of 33 eyes (55%) treated with triamcinolone gained 5 or more letters of best-corrected visual acuity compared with 5 of 32 eyes (16%) treated with placebo (P = 0.002). Macular edema was reduced by 1 or more grades as determined by masked semiquantitative contact lens examination in 25 of 33 treated eyes (75%) versus 5 of 32 untreated eyes (16%; P<0.0001). Optical coherence tomography showed a mean reduction of central retinal thickness of 152 mum in the 21 treated eyes that were examined compared with a reduction of 36 mum in 20 placebo-treated eyes. Infectious endophthalmitis developed in 1 triamcinolone-treated eye that was treated adequately without loss of visual acuity. In the short term, intravitreal triamcinolone is an effective and relatively safe treatment for eyes with diabetic macular edema that have failed laser treatment. Although it will be essential to study longer-term outcomes, the use of intravitreal triamcinolone may be considered in 1 eye of patients who continue to lose vision from diabetic macular edema despite conventional management.