Parolini B, Panozzo G, Gusson E, Pinackatt S, Bertoldo G, Rottini S, Pignatto S
Teclo Vitreo-Retinal Service, Verona, Italy.
Semin Ophthalmol. 2004 Mar-Jun;19(1-2):1-12. doi: 10.1080/08820530490519925.
To determine the effectiveness and safety of diode laser, pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with gas tamponade, and intravitreal triamcinolone (IVT) as possible treatments for diffuse diabetic macular edema (dDME). To determine whether the new macular edema Classification previously proposed by some of the authors may help as a guide in the choice of treatment.
A retrospective, comparative study of 169 eyes with dDME that underwent treatment. The eyes divided into 3 groups: in the PPV Group, 59 eyes received PPV with gas tamponade; in the DIODE Group, 53 eyes received a laser grid; in the IVT Group, 57 eyes received an intravitreal injection of 4 mg of triamcinolone acetonide. The follow up ranged from 6 to 24 months. The eyes were classified according to the new DME Classification based on OCT.
Change in foveal thickness as determined by Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT); change in visual acuity; intra and postoperative complications.
Mean visual acuity (VA) improved at 3 months with every treatment. At one year only eyes which underwent PPV still had better VA than the pre-op value, while eyes which underwent IVT and laser treatment showed regression. PPV show the greater percentage of eyes which gain 3 or more lines of VA at one year (17%). Mean foveal thickness improved at 3 months with every treatment. Only the eyes into the PPV Group showed relatively low foveal thickness at one year. Better final VA and foveal thickness were obtained if preop VA is > or = 0.3 and if earlier stages of DME were treated according to the new DME Classification. PPV was the treatment which offered the most stable results with at one year or longer. Similar results were observed into the PPV Groups as a whole and into a subgroup of eyes with preoperative PVD. No complications were encountered with laser diode treatment. Long term complications into the IVT Group were elevated IOP (8%), retinal detachment (3.5%) and posterior cataract (15%). Long term complications into the PPV Group were retinal detachment (3.4%) and cataract (90%).
Diode laser, PPV with gas tamponade and IVT are effective alternative treatments to decrease foveal thickness and improve visual acuity in eyes with DME. However while the results of PPV are stable in the long term follow-up, diode laser and IVT do not offer stable results. Complications may be severe with PPV and IVT. It is necessary to carefully select cases which would benefit from these types of treatments. The authors think that the OCT Classification may serve as a guide for the choice of treatment.
确定二极管激光、玻璃体腔注气的玻璃体切割术(PPV)及玻璃体内注射曲安奈德(IVT)作为弥漫性糖尿病性黄斑水肿(dDME)可能的治疗方法的有效性和安全性。确定部分作者先前提出的新的黄斑水肿分类是否有助于指导治疗选择。
对169例接受治疗的dDME患眼进行回顾性比较研究。患眼分为3组:PPV组,59例患眼接受玻璃体腔注气的PPV治疗;二极管激光组,53例患眼接受激光格栅光凝;IVT组,57例患眼接受玻璃体内注射4mg曲安奈德。随访时间为6至24个月。根据基于光学相干断层扫描(OCT)的新的糖尿病性黄斑水肿(DME)分类对患眼进行分类。
通过光学相干断层扫描(OCT)测定的黄斑中心凹厚度变化;视力变化;术中及术后并发症。
每种治疗方法在3个月时平均视力(VA)均有改善。在1年时,只有接受PPV治疗的患眼视力仍优于术前,而接受IVT和激光治疗的患眼视力出现下降。PPV组在1年时视力提高3行或更多行的患眼比例更高(17%)。每种治疗方法在3个月时黄斑中心凹平均厚度均有改善。只有PPV组的患眼在1年时黄斑中心凹厚度相对较低。如果术前视力≥0.3且根据新的DME分类对DME早期阶段进行治疗,则可获得更好的最终视力和黄斑中心凹厚度。PPV是在1年或更长时间内效果最稳定 的治疗方法。在整个PPV组以及术前存在玻璃体后脱离(PVD)的患眼亚组中观察到类似结果。二极管激光治疗未出现并发症。IVT组的长期并发症包括眼压升高(8%)、视网膜脱离(3.5%)和后发性白内障(15%)。PPV组的长期并发症包括视网膜脱离(3.4%)和白内障(90%)。
二极管激光、玻璃体腔注气的PPV和IVT是降低DME患眼黄斑中心凹厚度和提高视力的有效替代治疗方法。然而,虽然PPV的结果在长期随访中是稳定的,但二极管激光和IVT的效果不稳定。PPV和IVT可能会出现严重并发症。有必要仔细选择能从这些治疗类型中获益的病例。作者认为OCT分类可作为治疗选择的指导。