Eye (London, England) · 2025
Safety and efficacy of supraciliary dexamethasone implantation for macular oedema: a preliminary comparative study.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Doganay Selim, Ucan Gunduz Gamze, Kiristioglu Mehmet Omer, Demirel Elif, Yalcinbayir Ozgur
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of dexamethasone implantation in the supraciliary (SC) space, a novel and potential effective implantation site, compared to intravitreal (IV) application.
METHODS: This prospective study included 39 eyes of 38 patients with macular oedema (ME) who underwent SC and IV dexamethasone implantation (SC-DEX and IV-DEX). Patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups and followed for 3 months. Preoperative and postoperative assessments included maximum retinal thickness (MRT), change in central retinal thickness between consecutive visits (ΔCRT), intraocular pressure (IOP), and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA).
RESULTS: Both SC-DEX and IV-DEX groups showed significant MRT reductions during at follow-up. In the SC group, MRT significantly decreased at 1st and 3rd months (p = 0.0002 for both), but not at 1st week (p = 0.2517). In the IV-DEX group, significant reductions in MRT were observed at all postoperative visits: 1st week (p = 0.0002), 1st month (p = 0.0004), and 3rd month (p = 0.0003). There were no significant differences in the change in ΔCRT between the SC-DEX and IV-DEX groups at any visit (p > 0.05). IOP did not show significant changes (p > 0.05). BCVA improved significantly in the SC group compared to the IV-DEX group during the first week (p = 0.014). No other perioperative or postoperative sight-threatening complications were noted in either group, including hypotony or endophthalmitis.
CONCLUSION: SC-DEX shows promise as an alternative for managing ME, offering similar effectiveness to IV-DEX with safe profile. Further studies are needed to confirm its long-term safety and efficacy.
METHODS: This prospective study included 39 eyes of 38 patients with macular oedema (ME) who underwent SC and IV dexamethasone implantation (SC-DEX and IV-DEX). Patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups and followed for 3 months. Preoperative and postoperative assessments included maximum retinal thickness (MRT), change in central retinal thickness between consecutive visits (ΔCRT), intraocular pressure (IOP), and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA).
RESULTS: Both SC-DEX and IV-DEX groups showed significant MRT reductions during at follow-up. In the SC group, MRT significantly decreased at 1st and 3rd months (p = 0.0002 for both), but not at 1st week (p = 0.2517). In the IV-DEX group, significant reductions in MRT were observed at all postoperative visits: 1st week (p = 0.0002), 1st month (p = 0.0004), and 3rd month (p = 0.0003). There were no significant differences in the change in ΔCRT between the SC-DEX and IV-DEX groups at any visit (p > 0.05). IOP did not show significant changes (p > 0.05). BCVA improved significantly in the SC group compared to the IV-DEX group during the first week (p = 0.014). No other perioperative or postoperative sight-threatening complications were noted in either group, including hypotony or endophthalmitis.
CONCLUSION: SC-DEX shows promise as an alternative for managing ME, offering similar effectiveness to IV-DEX with safe profile. Further studies are needed to confirm its long-term safety and efficacy.