Comparison of Ranibizumab Treatment Response of Superior and Inferior Temporal Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion: A Year Follow-Up

• Published in: Beyoglu eye journal 2022-01, Vol.7 (3), p.207-212
• Main Authors: Kumral, Esra Turkseven, Nursal Melda Yenerel, Nimet Yesim Ercalik, Karabaş, Levent
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Edema; Visual acuity
• ISSN: 2459-1777; 2587-0394
• DOI: 10.14744/bej.2022.46794

[LANGUAGE= "English"] OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to compare ranibizumab treatment response of macular edema secondary to superior and inferior temporal branch retinal vein occlusion.METHODS: Sixty-four eyes of 64 patients treated with 0.5 mg/0.05 mL ranibizumab due to macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion were enrolled in this retrospective study. Thirty-eight eyes with superior temporal branch retinal vein occlusion were classified as Group 1 and 26 eyes with inferior temporal branch retinal vein occlusion as Group 2. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and the number of intravitreal injections were evaluated and compared between the groups.RESULTS: The mean baseline, 3rd, 6th, 9th, and 12th month BCVA values in Group 1 were 0.77±0.47, 0.37±0.20, 0.37±0.22, 0.38±0.24, and 0.35±0.18 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) and in Group 2 were 0.75±0.45, 0.37±0.18, 0.35±0.19, 0.32±0.17, and 0.28±0.20 logMAR, respectively. The mean baseline, 3rd, 6th, 9th, and 12th month CMT values in Group 1 were 522.92±136.01, 318.03±66.65, 287.53±48.27, 271.95±32.47, and 280.47±91.66 µm and in Group 2 were 524.08±145.51, 289.85±53.08, 268.96±31.57, 260.77±30.22, and 244.04±44.78 µm, respectively. BCVA and CMT improved significantly within both groups after the treatment (p0.05). However, a significantly higher number of injections was needed for Group 1.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Ranibizumab improved the visual and anatomical outcomes similarly in both superior and inferior temporal branch retinal vein occlusion with macular edema. However, more frequent injections were needed to achieve the same efficacy in superior temporal branch retinal vein occlusion.