We have located links that may give you full text access.
ENGLISH ABSTRACT
JOURNAL ARTICLE
[Pro re nata anti-VEGF treatment results for neovascular age-related macular degeneration in routine clinical treatment: comparison of single with triple injections].
BACKGROUND: Different injection regimens from continuous to pro re nata (PRN) have been proposed for treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). So far the PRN single injection on reactivation regimen has not been compared to the PRN triple injection on reactivation regimen (IVAN scheme).
OBJECTIVE: Comparison of the two nAMD PRN injection regimens with single and triple injections on reactivation in a real-world setting in a retrospective case series in two German treatment centers.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Naïve nAMD patients, who started treatment according to either the single or triple injection regimen were included. Endpoints were best corrected visual acuity (LogMAR), central retinal thickness on optical coherence tomography (μm) and number of injections, all at 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months after treatment initiation.
RESULTS: A total of 146 patients with single injection and 148 patients with triple injection regimens were included. There were no significant differences between the two treatment regimens in best corrected visual acuity (single vs. triple injection scheme: 0.50 ± 0.42 vs. 0.56 ± 0.42, p = 0.14), central retinal thickness (303 ± 76.2 vs. 306 ± 110, p = 0.79) and number of injections (13 ± 4.4 vs. 12 ± 5.4, p = 0.31). This was the case for all analyzed time points.
CONCLUSION: There were no significant functional or morphological differences between the two PRN injection regimens with single and triple injections on reactivation after 24 months. For evaluation of long-term therapy results further studies are warranted.
OBJECTIVE: Comparison of the two nAMD PRN injection regimens with single and triple injections on reactivation in a real-world setting in a retrospective case series in two German treatment centers.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Naïve nAMD patients, who started treatment according to either the single or triple injection regimen were included. Endpoints were best corrected visual acuity (LogMAR), central retinal thickness on optical coherence tomography (μm) and number of injections, all at 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months after treatment initiation.
RESULTS: A total of 146 patients with single injection and 148 patients with triple injection regimens were included. There were no significant differences between the two treatment regimens in best corrected visual acuity (single vs. triple injection scheme: 0.50 ± 0.42 vs. 0.56 ± 0.42, p = 0.14), central retinal thickness (303 ± 76.2 vs. 306 ± 110, p = 0.79) and number of injections (13 ± 4.4 vs. 12 ± 5.4, p = 0.31). This was the case for all analyzed time points.
CONCLUSION: There were no significant functional or morphological differences between the two PRN injection regimens with single and triple injections on reactivation after 24 months. For evaluation of long-term therapy results further studies are warranted.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Anti-Arrhythmic Effects of Heart Failure Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy and Their Role in the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death: From Beta-Blockers to Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors and Beyond.Journal of Clinical Medicine 2024 Februrary 27
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app