Vitrectomy for non-ischaemic macular oedema in retinal vein occlusion.
Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2006 Dec;84(6):812-4.
Department of Ophthalmology, Lund University Hospital, Sweden.
To evaluate the effect of vitrectomy in eyes with non-ischaemic macular oedema secondary to hemi and central retinal vein occlusion. Methods: This retrospective study analysed the outcome of eight patients with non-ischaemic macular oedema without posterior vitreous detachment. Six patients had a central retinal vein occlusion and two had a hemi retinal vein occlusion. A standard three-port vitrectomy was performed in all patients. Retinal mapping by optical coherence tomography and visual acuity (VA) testing were performed before vitrectomy and at 1, 2 and 12 months postoperatively.
At the 1-month follow-up there was a statistically significant reduction in retinal thickness (Wilcoxon; p = 0.04) that persisted at 2 months (Wilcoxon; p = 0.04). However, at 12 months there was no difference compared with baseline. LogMAR VA was significantly improved at 1 month (Wilcoxon p = 0.04), but at 2 and 12 months there was no difference compared with baseline.
Vitrectomy in hemi and central retinal vein occlusion has the potential to reduce macular oedema and improve VA in the early postoperative phase but does not seem to improve the longterm outcome of the disease.
PMID: 17083544 [PubMed - in process]
* * * * *
Macular oedema in central retinal vein occlusion treated with intravitreal triamcinolone.
Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2006 Jun;84(3):314-8
Department of Ophthalmology, Rocky Mountain Lions Eye Institute, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, 80041, USA.
To investigate the efficacy of intravitreal triamcinolone as treatment for macular oedema in central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO).
We conducted a retrospective comparative case series of nine patients with macular oedema associated with CRVO (six non-ischaemic and three ischaemic) treated with an intravitreal injection of 4 mg triamcinolone acetonide, compared with 10 control (observation) patients (six non-ischaemic and four ischaemic). Examination included visual acuity (VA) tests and complete ophthalmic examinations at baseline, 1, 2 and 6 months postoperatively.
The mean baseline VA was 20/161 for CRVO treatment group patients and 20/75 for observation group patients (p = 0.15). No significant difference in VA between CRVO treatment group patients (20/99) and controls (20/282) was observed at the final 6-month visit (p = 0.33). Subgroup analysis of the non-ischaemic CRVO treatment patients compared with the non-ischaemic controls also showed no significant difference at the 6-month visit (20/59 and 20/100, respectively; p = 0.20). At 6 months, five of the six non-ischaemic treated patients had VA >or= 20/100, compared with five of the six non-ischaemic control patients. All patients tolerated the procedure well, but there was a significant increase in intraocular pressure by the 2-month visit (p = 0.015).
Intravitreal injection of triamcinolone may not be effective for treatment of macular oedema in all CRVO patients or all non-ischaemic CRVO patients. A trend towards VA improvement was noted but was not statistically significant. Although our treatment was not hindered by severe complications, there was a significant increase in IOP in the 2 months following treatment.