May 2006
Volume 47, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2006
Intravitreal Injection of Bevacizumab in Patients With Macular Edema Due to Central and Branch Vein Occlusion
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • K. Petermeier
    Vitreoretinal Surgery, University Eye Hospital, Tubingen, Germany
  • Tuebingen Bevacizumab Study Group
    Vitreoretinal Surgery, University Eye Hospital, Tubingen, Germany
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  K. Petermeier, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2006, Vol.47, 4286. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      K. Petermeier, Tuebingen Bevacizumab Study Group; Intravitreal Injection of Bevacizumab in Patients With Macular Edema Due to Central and Branch Vein Occlusion . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2006;47(13):4286.

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

Purpose: : Ocular vein occlusion often leads to severe reduction of visual acuity (VA) due to a macular edema. Recently, intravitreal application of bevacizumab indicated a potent antiedematous effect. This prospective, uncontrolled study was to investigate the therapeutic properties of an intravitreal injection of bevacicumab in the treatment of macular edema secondary to vein occlusion.

Methods: : The study population consisted of 11 eyes of 11 patients with secondary macular edema, due to central vein occlusion (CVO) in 7 patients and due to branch vein occlusion in 4 patients (BVO). All eyes received intravitreal injection of 1.0 mg bevacizumab. Comprehensive ophthalmic examination was performed at baseline, 1 day, 1 week and in 7 patients 4 weeks after treatment. Macular morphologic changes were observed using fluorescein angiography and optical coherence tomography.

Results: : Median preoperative VA was 0.9 LogMAR (range 0.4–1.8) for all patients (CVO 0.8, BVO 0.95). At the 1st postoperative day, the median VA was 0.85 LogMAR (range 0.3–1.6) (CVO 0.75, BVO 0.85) and increased to a median VA of 0.5 LogMAR (range 0.1–1.6) (CVO 0.5, BVO 0.8) one week after treatment. At one month follow–up, median VA was 0.3 LogMAR (range 0–1.6) (CVO 0.3, BVO 0.45) compared to 0.8 (range 0.4–1.8) at baseline. Median reduction of the macular edema was 285 µm (CVO 292.5 µm, 250 BVO µm) the 1st postoperative day, 360 µm (CVO 480 µm BVO 295 µm) after one week and 355 µm (CVO 369 µm BVO 305 µm) after one month.

Conclusions: : The findings from our study indicate that intravitreal injection of bevacizumab may be effective in decreasing macular edema and improving visual acuity. No inflammation or IOP–rise or severe side effects were detected. Therefore, it might be a promising therapeutic method in the treatment of secondary macular edema after vein occlusion.

Keywords: macula/fovea • retina • clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: outcomes/complications 

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.