Isfahan University of Medical Sciences

Science Communicator Platform

Stay connected! Follow us on X network (Twitter):
Share this content! On (X network) By
Intravitreal Injections of Bevacizumab Plus Methotrexate Versus Bevacizumab Alone for the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema: A Randomized, Sham-Controlled Trial Publisher



Fazel F1 ; Oliya B1 ; Mirmohammadkhani M2, 3 ; Fazel M1 ; Yadegarfar G4 ; Pourazizi M1, 5
Authors
Show Affiliations
Authors Affiliations
  1. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Isfahan Eye Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
  2. 2. Social Determinants of Health Research Center
  3. 3. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Medicine, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran
  4. 4. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
  5. 5. Pediatric Inherited Diseases Research Center, Research Institute for Primordial Prevention of Non-Communicable Disease, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Source: Journal of Current Ophthalmology Published:2020


Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) combined with intravitreal methotrexate (IVM) in the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME). Methods: In this prospective, interventional contralateral eye study, patients with bilateral DME were randomly allocated to receive three monthly injections of IVB (1.25 mg/0.05 mL) plus IVM (400 μg; 0.16 cc) or IVB alone. The outcome measure was changes in the best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and central macular volume (CMV). Results: Thirty-six treatment-naive eyes of 18 patients with a mean age of 62.38 ± 6.2 years were included in the study. BCVA logMAR changed from 0.95 ± 0.53 at baseline to 0.75 ± 0.53 in the combination group and from 0.72 ± 0.57 to 0.49 ± 0.50 in the IVB alone group at 1 month after the 3rd injection. BCVA improvement in both groups was not statistically significant compared with the baseline value (P > 0.99). Compared with the baseline values, mean CMT and CMV were reduced in both groups; however, these changes did not reach a significant level. The differences of CMT changes between the groups were not statistically significant at month 1 (P = 0.82), month 2 (P = 0.21), and month 3 (P = 0.10). Furthermore, the differences of CMV changes between the groups were not statistically significant at month 1 (P = 0.76), month 2 (P = 0.82), and month 3 (P = 0.11). Conclusions: This pilot study demonstrated no significant therapeutic effects for IVB combined with IVM compared to IVB alone in treatment-naive DME patients over a 3-month course. © 2020 Journal of Current Ophthalmology | Published by Wolters Kluwer-Medknow.
Experts (# of related papers)
Other Related Docs
26. Relation Between Intraocular Pressure and Duration of Diabetes, Journal of Isfahan Medical School (2015)
30. Inverted Ilm Flap Technique in Optic Disc Pit Maculopathy, Journal of Ophthalmic and Vision Research (2023)
44. Topiramate and the Vision: A Systematic Review, Clinical Ophthalmology (2012)
49. Effects of Propranolol in Patients With Central Serous Chorioretinopathy, Journal of Research in Medical Sciences (2008)