Tehran University of Medical Sciences

Science Communicator Platform

Stay connected! Follow us on X network (Twitter):
Share this content! On (X network) By
Combination of Intravitreal Bevacizumab and Erythropoietin Versus Intravitreal Bevacizumab Alone for Refractory Diabetic Macular Edema: A Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial Publisher Pubmed



Entezari M1 ; Flavarjani ZK1 ; Ramezani A1 ; Nikkhah H1 ; Karimi S2 ; Moghadam HF1 ; Daftarian N1 ; Yaseri M3
Authors
Show Affiliations
Authors Affiliations
  1. 1. Ophthalmic Research Center, Department of Ophthalmology, Imam Hossein Medical Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  2. 2. Ophthalmic Research Center, Department of Ophthalmology, Torfe Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  3. 3. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Source: Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology Published:2019


Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of three intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injections alone or in combination with intravitreal erythropoietin (EPO) in the treatment of refractory diabetic macular edema (DME). Methods: In a randomized double-blind clinical trial, 48 eyes of 34 diabetic patients with refractory DME were enrolled. Eyes were randomly assigned to receive either 3 monthly injections of 0.05 cc (1.25 mg) IVB plus 0.05 cc (1000 unit) EPO or 0.05 cc (1.25 mg) IVB alone. Main outcome was best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) changes and secondary outcome was central macular thickness (CMT). The patients were followed for 6 months. Results: Mean BCVA changes up to 4 and 6 months were insignificant in both groups. It changed from 0.72 ± 0.56 logMAR at baseline to 0.74 ± 0.5 (P = 0.85) and 0.71 ± 0.44 (P = 0.40) in the combination group and from 0.48 ± 0.39 logMAR to 0.47 ± 0.35 (P = 0.48) and 0.52 ± 0.33 (P = 0.69) in the IVB alone group, at 4 and 6 months, respectively. The difference of mean BCVA changes between the groups was insignificant at both 4 and 6 months (P = 0.07 and P = 0.36, respectively). Within the group changes of mean CMT were significant only in the combination group at 4 and 6 months, from 518 ± 134 μ at baseline to 472 ± 151 to 475 ± 167 μ, respectively (P = 0.01 and P = 0.05). Corresponding changes were not significant in the IVB alone group. However, the difference between the groups was not significant at all visits (P = 0.51 and P = 0.71, respectively). Conclusions: This clinical trial demonstrated that intravitreal erythropoietin had no additional effect to IVB in the treatment of refractory DME in the short term. Trial registration: Clinical trials.gov identifier: NCT03821168. © 2019, Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.