April 2009
Volume 50, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2009
Verteporfin Photodynamic Therapy of Retinal Capillary Hemangioma
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • R. Sachdeva
    Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
  • H. Dadgostar
    Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
  • P. K. Kaiser
    Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
  • J. E. Sears
    Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
  • A. D. Singh
    Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  R. Sachdeva, None; H. Dadgostar, None; P.K. Kaiser, None; J.E. Sears, None; A.D. Singh, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  Research to Prevent Blindness
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2009, Vol.50, 5231. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      R. Sachdeva, H. Dadgostar, P. K. Kaiser, J. E. Sears, A. D. Singh; Verteporfin Photodynamic Therapy of Retinal Capillary Hemangioma. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2009;50(13):5231.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Purpose: : To evaluate the efficacy of verteporfin (Visudyne) photodynamic therapy of retinal capillary hemangioma.

Methods: : Following a period of observation, all 5 eyes received 1-3 courses of standard verteporfin photodynamic therapy (VPDT) upon development of vision-threatening complications of hemangioma. Standard therapy consisted of administration of intravenous verteporfin (6mg/m2 body surface area) followed by VPDT with a Diode laser (689/690 nm) with an intensity of 600mW/cm2 for exposure of 83 seconds (50 J/cm2). Follow up included documentation of best-corrected Snellen visual acuity (BCVA), tumor regression, and presence of SRF as measured by dilated fundus examination, fundus photos, and optical coherence tomography (OCT) readings. These parameters were documented at one week, one month, and three months following each VPDT session and continues to date (up to 18 months following first VPDT).

Results: : BCVA improved or stabilized in 4 eyes. All eyes showed favorable response to VPDT with tumor regression or stabilization as well as resolution of SRF. Three eyes required VPDT retreatment for recurrent SRF. Additionally, epiretinal membrane and TRD worsened in three eyes, requiring vitreoretinal surgery. Vaso-occlusive effects, as previously reported, were not observed in this case series.

Conclusions: : VPDT is an important treatment modality for retinal capillary hemangioma. It is effective in tumor regression as well as resolution of SRF, leading to stabilization or improvement of visual acuity. Resultant visual acuity may be compromised by recurrence of SRF or tumor fibrosis leading to worsening vitreal macular traction and TRD. While this case series shows promising results, a larger study is necessary to validate these findings.This work was supported by a Research to Prevent Blindness Challenge Grant, Department of Ophthalmology, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine.

Keywords: tumors • photodynamic therapy 

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.