Department of Ophthalmology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, China.
Department of Ophthalmology, Jiuiang No. 1 People's Hospital, Jiujiang, China.
Ophthalmic Res. 2021;64(2):237-245. doi: 10.1159/000509171. Epub 2020 Jun 5.
The aim of this work was to evaluate the association between pretreatment inflammation-based factors and outcomes in patients with macular edema (ME) secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO) and its subtypes after intravitreal ranibizumab or conbercept implant.
This retrospective observational study included patients who were diagnosed with ME secondary to RVO at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University between January 2017 and January 2019, and who subsequently received intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment. Blood-based parameters were measured before treatment, and correlations between best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and each of 3 parameters - neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) - were analyzed to identify predictors of effective intravitreal injection treatment outcomes.
A total of 315 treatment-naïve eyes treated with anti-VEGF drugs for RVO-ME were retrospectively analyzed in this study. The mean PLR value was significantly different in the effective and ineffective group for RVO-ME (138.03 ± 48.61 vs. 106.79 ± 27.28), branch RVO (BRVO)-ME (216.47 ± 53.04 vs. 185.94 ± 51.47), and central RVO (CRVO)-ME (231.07 ± 66.05 vs. 196.20 ± 60.44). The cutoff value of the PLR was 97.92, the area under the curve was 0.70, and the sensitivity and specificity were 81.5 and 44.3%, respectively. The mean NLR value was significantly different in the effective and ineffective groups for RVO-ME (2.20 ± 1.40 vs. 1.92 ± 0.89), and BRVO-ME (2.01 ± 0.80 vs. 1.82 ± 0.84), but not in patients with CRVO-ME (2.51 ± 2.02 vs. 2.12 ± 0.95). There are no significant differences between BRVO-ME and its subtype groups in MLR values. But the mean MLR value was significantly higher in the conbercept group than in the ranibizu-mab group among patients in the effective group (0.27 ± 0.11 vs. 0.25 ± 0.14).
Higher pretreatment PLR was associated with BCVA in patients with RVO-ME and its subtypes who were treated with anti-VEGF drugs. The PLR may be used as a predictive and prognostic tool for effective intravitreal injection treatment outcomes.
本研究旨在评估视网膜静脉阻塞(RVO)及其各亚型继发黄斑水肿(ME)患者在接受玻璃体内雷珠单抗或康柏西普治疗前炎症相关因素与结局的相关性。
本回顾性观察性研究纳入了 2017 年 1 月至 2019 年 1 月在南昌大学第一附属医院诊断为 RVO 继发 ME 并随后接受玻璃体内抗血管内皮生长因子(VEGF)治疗的患者。在治疗前测量了血液参数,并分析了中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞比值(NLR)、单核细胞与淋巴细胞比值(MLR)和血小板与淋巴细胞比值(PLR)这 3 个参数中的每一个与最佳矫正视力(BCVA)之间的相关性,以确定预测玻璃体内注射治疗效果的指标。
本研究共对 315 例接受抗 VEGF 药物治疗的 RVO-ME 治疗初治眼进行了回顾性分析。RVO-ME(138.03 ± 48.61 比 106.79 ± 27.28)、分支 RVO-ME(BRVO-ME)(216.47 ± 53.04 比 185.94 ± 51.47)和中央 RVO-ME(CRVO-ME)(231.07 ± 66.05 比 196.20 ± 60.44)患者的有效和无效组之间的平均 PLR 值差异有统计学意义。PLR 的截断值为 97.92,曲线下面积为 0.70,灵敏度和特异性分别为 81.5%和 44.3%。RVO-ME(2.20 ± 1.40 比 1.92 ± 0.89)和 BRVO-ME(2.01 ± 0.80 比 1.82 ± 0.84)患者的有效和无效组之间的平均 NLR 值差异有统计学意义,但 CRVO-ME 患者的 NLR 值差异无统计学意义(2.51 ± 2.02 比 2.12 ± 0.95)。BRVO-ME 及其亚型组之间的 MLR 值差异无统计学意义。但是,在有效组中,康柏西普组的平均 MLR 值(0.27 ± 0.11)明显高于雷珠单抗组(0.25 ± 0.14)。
在接受抗 VEGF 药物治疗的 RVO-ME 及其各亚型患者中,较高的预处理 PLR 与 BCVA 相关。PLR 可能作为预测和评估玻璃体内注射治疗效果的指标。