Displaying all 4 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Sahoo S, Barua A, Myint KT, Haq A, Abas AB, Nair NS
    PMID: 25686158 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010009.pub2
    Diabetic cystoid macular oedema (CMO) is a condition which involves fluid accumulation in the inner portion of the retina. It often follows changes in retinal blood vessels which enhance the fluid to come out of vessels. Although it may be asymptomatic, symptoms are primarily painless loss of central vision, often with the complaint of seeing black spots in front of the eye.It is reported that CMO may resolve spontaneously, or fluctuate for months, before causing loss of vision. If left untreated or undiagnosed, progression of CMO may lead to permanent visual loss.It has been noted that patients with diabetic retinopathy have elevated inflammatory markers, and therefore it is likely that inflammation aids in the progression of vascular disease in these patients. Several topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) such as ketorolac 0.5%, bromfenac 0.09%, and nepafenac 0.1%, have therefore also been used topically to treat chronic diabetic CMO. Hence this review was conducted to find out the effects of topical NSAIDs in diabetic CMO.
    Matched MeSH terms: Macular Edema/drug therapy*
  2. Norlaili M, Bakiah S, Zunaina E
    BMC Ophthalmol, 2011;11:36.
    PMID: 22111945 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2415-11-36
    BACKGROUND: Diabetic macular oedema is the leading causes of blindness. Laser photocoagulation reduces the risk of visual loss. However recurrences are common and despite laser treatment, patients with diabetic macular oedema experienced progressive loss of vision. Stabilization of the blood retinal barrier introduces a rationale for intravitreal triamcinolone treatment in diabetic macular oedema. This study is intended to compare the best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and the macular oedema index (MEI) at 3 month of primary treatment for diabetic macular oedema between intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) and laser photocoagulation.
    METHODS: This comparative pilot study consists of 40 diabetic patients with diabetic macular oedema. The patients were randomized into two groups using envelope technique sampling procedure. Treatment for diabetic macular oedema was based on the printed envelope technique selected for every patient. Twenty patients were assigned for IVTA group (one injection of IVTA) and another 20 patients for LASER group (one laser session). Main outcome measures were mean BCVA and mean MEI at three months post treatment. The MEI was quantified using Heidelberg Retinal Tomography II.
    RESULTS: The mean difference for BCVA at baseline [IVTA: 0.935 (0.223), LASER: 0.795 (0.315)] and at three months post treatment [IVTA: 0.405 (0.224), LASER: 0.525 (0.289)] between IVTA and LASER group was not statistically significant (p = 0.113 and p = 0.151 respectively). The mean difference for MEI at baseline [IVTA: 2.539 (0.914), LASER: 2.139 (0.577)] and at three months post treatment [IVTA: 1.753 (0.614), LASER: 1.711 (0.472)] between IVTA and LASER group was also not statistically significant (p = 0.106 and p = 0.811 respectively).
    CONCLUSIONS: IVTA demonstrates good outcome comparable to laser photocoagulation as a primary treatment for diabetic macular oedema at three months post treatment.
    TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN05040192 (http://www.controlled-trial.com).
    Matched MeSH terms: Macular Edema/drug therapy*
  3. Chhablani J, Wong K, Tan GS, Sudhalkar A, Laude A, Cheung CMG, et al.
    Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila), 2020;9(5):426-434.
    PMID: 32956188 DOI: 10.1097/APO.0000000000000312
    PURPOSE: The aim of this consensus article was to provide comprehensive recommendations in the management of diabetic macular edema (DME) by reviewing recent clinical evidence.

    DESIGN: A questionnaire containing 47 questions was developed which encompassed clinical scenarios such as treatment response to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor and steroid, treatment side effects, as well as cost and compliance/reimbursement in the management of DME using a Dephi questionnaire as guide.

    METHODS: An expert panel of 12 retinal specialists from Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines, India and Vietnam responded to this questionnaire on two separate occasions. The first round responses were compiled, analyzed and discussed in a round table discussion where a consensus was sought through voting. Consensus was considered achieved, when 9 of the 12 panellists (75%) agreed on a recommendation.

    RESULTS: The DME patients were initially profiled based on their response to treatment, and the terms target response, adequate response, nonresponse, and inadequate response were defined. The panellists arrived at a consensus on various aspects of DME treatment such as need for classification of patients before treatment, first-line treatment options, appropriate time to switch between treatment modalities, and steroid-related side effects based on which recommendations were derived, and a treatment algorithm was developed.

    CONCLUSIONS: This consensus article provides comprehensive, evidence-based treatment guidelines in the management of DME in Asian population. In addition, it also provides recommendations on other aspects of DME management such as steroid treatment for stable glaucoma patients, management of intraocular pressure rise, and recommendations for cataract development.

    Matched MeSH terms: Macular Edema/drug therapy*
  4. Subrayan V, Khaw KW, Peyman M, Koay AC, Tajunisah I
    Ophthalmologica, 2013;229(4):208-11.
    PMID: 23548379 DOI: 10.1159/000348630
    To evaluate the outcome of intravitreal bevacizumab in the treatment of radiation-induced cystoid macular oedema among patients who underwent external beam radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma.
    Matched MeSH terms: Macular Edema/drug therapy*
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links