Alpha1 Adrenergic Receptors

Using logistic regression, the OR for treatment suggests an 82

Using logistic regression, the OR for treatment suggests an 82.5% reduction in the odds of high CVP for those who developed a successful L-CRA compared with controls (p 0.0001). Open in a separate window Figure 4 CVP at (A) baseline and (B) 24 months for the control, non-functioning L-CRA and functioning L-CRA groups. CVP and injection loads and offered improved BCVA. Trial registration number ACTRN12612000004864. strong class=”kwd-title” Keywords: retina, treatment lasers, clinical trial Key messages What is already known about this subject? While the current treatments for central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) with vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors represent a major advance in visual outcomes, they fail to address the underlying causal pathology, which is an obstruction to venous outflow, and also involve a considerable burden of therapy for patients and health services. What are the new findings? The creation of a laser-induced chorioretinal anastomosis by providing a bypass to this obstruction addresses causal pathology and reduces central venous pressure (CVP), which up until the current time has remained an unaddressed component of macular oedema, and improves both visual outcomes and treatment burden. How might these results change the focus of research or clinical practice? Treatments to reduce CVP and obstruction to venous outflow in CRVO can improve outcomes, and further research into how this can be achieved safely and reliably is usually warranted. Introduction The treatment outcomes for central retinal vein occlusion Rabbit Polyclonal to CAMK2D (CRVO) have dramatically improved following the advent of intravitreal administration of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) antagonists.1C4 While this approach delivers significant benefits in terms of improving best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), these brokers impose a considerable burden to both the patients and the health services. The treatments may be required for years at considerable financial, time and resource cost to both the patient and the health authority.5 6 These agents address only the component of the CRVO-induced macular oedema secondary to the upregulated VEGF, without having any effect on the underlying causal pathology, which is an obstruction to venous outflow. We have previously reported the 2-year results of a randomised clinical trial (RCT) comparing visual outcomes and injection loads in patients with CRVO treated with either ranibizumab monotherapy or ranibizumab combined with a laser-induced chorioretinal anastomosis (L-CRA).7 Compared with the monotherapy group, the overall combination group, which included both those with a successful development of an L-CRA (82.5%) and those that were unsuccessful, showed significantly lower injection loads, greater reduction in central subfield thickness (CST) and improved BCVA. As it appears to be beneficial to address the obstruction to venous outflow by an L-CRA as a causal-based treatment, in addition to conventional VEGF blockade, this post-hoc analysis investigates the association between central venous pressure (CVP), CST, injection load and BCVA in those in the group with a successful or functioning anastomosis (82.8% of the total combination group) versus those treated with ranibizumab monotherapy alone. This may illustrate what potential additional outcome benefits may be achieved where both the obstruction to venous outflow as well as the cytokine dysregulation have been addressed in CRVO. Materials and methods A randomised, 24-month study was conducted at the Lions Eye Institute, Perth, Western Australia, comparing the efficacy of combining L-CRA with intravitreal ranibizumab AZD8797 versus ranibizumab alone (control) for patients with macular oedema secondary to CRVO.7 Entry criteria, treatment schedules and retreatment criteria were based on the CRUISE study.1 All patients were randomised to either an L-CRA8 9 or sham procedure at baseline (month 0), with monthly ranibizumab 0.5?mg injections as per the CRUISE study, then commencing for 6 months (months 1C7) from month 1 before entering the monthly maintenance pro re nata (PRN) AZD8797 phase from months 7 to 24. As there is some evidence that the development of an L-CRA is VEGF-dependent,8 intravitreal VEGF therapy was not initiated until 1?month.The sponsor of the drug had no role in the design or conduct of this research. with 7.07 (6.08 to 8.06) for the control group (p 0.0001). The mean BCVA was averaged across all timepoints between the control and functioning L-CRA groups (average difference=11.46 (3.16 to 19.75) letters, p=0.01). At 2?years, there was an 82.5% reduction in the odds of high CVP (greater or equal to central retinal artery diastolic pressure) for those with a successful L-CRA compared with controls (p 0.0001). Conclusion For patients with CRVO, adding L-CRA as a causal-based treatment to AZD8797 conventional therapy reduced CVP and injection loads and offered improved BCVA. Trial registration number ACTRN12612000004864. strong class=”kwd-title” Keywords: retina, treatment lasers, clinical trial Key AZD8797 messages What is already known about this subject? While the current treatments for central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) with vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors represent a major advance in visual outcomes, they fail to address the underlying causal pathology, which is an obstruction to venous outflow, and also involve a considerable burden of therapy for patients and health services. What are the new findings? The creation of AZD8797 a laser-induced chorioretinal anastomosis by providing a bypass to this obstruction addresses causal pathology and reduces central venous pressure (CVP), which up until the current time has remained an unaddressed component of macular oedema, and improves both visual outcomes and treatment burden. How might these results change the focus of research or clinical practice? Treatments to reduce CVP and obstruction to venous outflow in CRVO can improve outcomes, and further research into how this can be achieved safely and reliably is warranted. Introduction The treatment outcomes for central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) have dramatically improved following the advent of intravitreal administration of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) antagonists.1C4 While this approach delivers significant benefits in terms of improving best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), these agents impose a considerable burden to both the patients and the health services. The treatments may be required for years at considerable financial, time and resource cost to both the patient and the health authority.5 6 These agents address only the component of the CRVO-induced macular oedema secondary to the upregulated VEGF, without having any effect on the underlying causal pathology, which is an obstruction to venous outflow. We have previously reported the 2-year results of a randomised clinical trial (RCT) comparing visual outcomes and injection loads in patients with CRVO treated with either ranibizumab monotherapy or ranibizumab combined with a laser-induced chorioretinal anastomosis (L-CRA).7 Compared with the monotherapy group, the overall combination group, which included both those with a successful development of an L-CRA (82.5%) and those that were unsuccessful, showed significantly lower injection loads, greater reduction in central subfield thickness (CST) and improved BCVA. As it appears to be beneficial to address the obstruction to venous outflow by an L-CRA as a causal-based treatment, in addition to conventional VEGF blockade, this post-hoc analysis investigates the association between central venous pressure (CVP), CST, injection load and BCVA in those in the group with a successful or functioning anastomosis (82.8% of the total combination group) versus those treated with ranibizumab monotherapy alone. This may illustrate what potential additional outcome benefits may be achieved where both the obstruction to venous outflow as well as the cytokine dysregulation have been addressed in CRVO. Materials and methods A randomised, 24-month study was conducted at the Lions Eye Institute, Perth, Western Australia, comparing the efficacy of combining L-CRA with intravitreal ranibizumab versus ranibizumab alone (control) for patients with macular oedema secondary to CRVO.7 Entry criteria, treatment schedules and retreatment criteria were based on the CRUISE study.1 All patients were randomised to either an L-CRA8 9 or sham procedure at baseline (month 0), with monthly ranibizumab 0.5?mg injections.

You may also like...