Efficacy of Conbercept 3+PRN and 5+PRN regimens in the treatment of macular edema secondary to ischemic branch retinal vein occlusion
10.3980/j.issn.1672-5123.2026.11.29
- VernacularTitle:康柏西普3+PRN与5+PRN方案治疗缺血型BRVO继发黄斑水肿的疗效
- Author:
Jing LIANG
1
;
Hua SONG
1
;
Xiaoying WANG
1
;
Yue WANG
1
;
Fei WANG
1
Author Information
1. Department of Ophthalmology, Luoyang First People's Hospital;Luoyang Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Health, Luoyang 471000, Henan Province, China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Conbercept;
macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO);
3+pro re nata (PRN);
5+PRN;
best corrected visual acuity;
central foveal retinal thickness
- From:
International Eye Science
2026;26(11):2044-2048
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
AIM: To compare the clinical efficacy of Conbercept 3+pro re nata(PRN)and 5+PRN regimens in the treatment of macular edema secondary to ischemic branch retinal vein occlusion(BRVO).METHODS: A retrospective cohort study design was adopted. Patients with macular edema secondary to ischemic BRVO admitted to our hospital from June 2021 to March 2024 were selected and divided into the 3+PRN group and the 5+PRN group. Both groups received intravitreal injections of Conbercept(0.5 mg per dose). The 3+PRN group received three consecutive monthly loading injections followed by PRN treatment, while the 5+PRN group received five consecutive monthly loading injections followed by PRN treatment. The best-corrected visual acuity(BCVA), central foveal retinal thickness(CRT), mean macular sensitivity(MS), number of injections, and adverse reactions were observed before treatment and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 mo after treatment in both groups.RESULTS:Totally 97 patients(97 eyes)were included. There were 49 cases(49 eyes)in 3+PRN group(26 males and 23 females, aged 58.61±8.67 y)and 48 cases(48 eyes)in 5+PRN group(23 males and 25 females, aged 59.18±8.54 y)(all P>0.05). There was no significant difference in BCVA and MS between the two groups before and after treatment(all P>0.05). CRT in 5+PRN group was smaller than that in 3+PRN group at 6 and 12 mo after treatment(all P<0.05). BCVA, CRT, and MS were improved after treatment compared with before treatment in both groups(all P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the total number of injections during the whole follow-up between the 5+PRN group(6.24±0.94 injections)and the 3+PRN group(6.41±0.88 injections)(P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups during follow-up(10% vs 13%, P=0.721).CONCLUSION: Both the Conbercept 3+PRN and 5+PRN regimens are safe and effective for treating macular edema secondary to ischemic BRVO. The 5+PRN regimen is characterized by “more injections in the early loading phase and fewer injections in the later PRN phase”, while the 3+PRN regimen features “fewer injections in the early loading phase and more injections in the later PRN phase”. The two regimens show comparable efficacy in long-term visual function improvement, while the 5+PRN regimen has greater advantages in macular edema resolution.
