PURPOSE: To compare clinical outcomes after intravitreal injection of triamcinolone acetonide or bevacizumab for the treatment of macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion. METHODS: Sixty-six patients received an intravitreal injection of either triamcinolone acetonide or bevacizumab. Patients were retrospectively reviewed. Thirty-three out of 66 patients were treated with an intravitreal injection of triamcinolone acetonide, while the other 33 patients received a bevacizumab injection. All patients underwent a visual acuity test, optical coherence tomography imaging and ophthalmoscopic examination throughout the follow-up. RESULTS: In the triamcinolone group, central macular thickness (CMT) decreased from 496.69 +/- 153.01 micrometer at baseline to 313.06 +/- 150.14 micrometer at the six-month follow-up visit, while in the bevacizumab group, CMT decreased from 441.30 +/- 185.79 micrometer to 295.67 +/- 188.80 micrometer (p<0.05). In the triamcinolone group, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improved from logMAR 0.92 +/- 0.70 at baseline to logMAR 0.53 +/- 0.43 at the six-month follow-up visit, and in the bevacizumab group, BCVA improved from logMAR 0.74 +/- 0.47 to logMAR 0.34 +/- 0.33 (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The therapeutic effects of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide showed no significant differences compared with those of intravitreal bevacizumab with regard to anatomical and functional outcomes.
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Intravitreal Injections ; Macular Edema ; Retinal Vein ; Retinal Vein Occlusion ; Retinaldehyde ; Retrospective Studies ; Tomography, Optical Coherence ; Triamcinolone ; Triamcinolone Acetonide ; Visual Acuity ; Bevacizumab