A prospective, randomized comparison of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide versus intravitreal bevacizumab (avastin) in diffuse diabetic macular edema

Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol. 2010 Jul;17(3):250-3. doi: 10.4103/0974-9233.65496.


Purpose: To compare the functional and anatomical outcomes following intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide vs. intravitreal bevacizumab (Avastin) treatment for diffuse diabetic macular edema.

Materials and methods: IN THIS PROSPECTIVE, RANDOMIZED STUDY, SUBJECTS WERE DIVIDED INTO TWO GROUPS: 24 eyes that received intravitreal injection of 4 mg/0.1 mL triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA group) and 24 eyes received intravitreal injection of 1.25 mg/0.05 mL bevacizumab (IVB group). Changes in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), baseline fluorescein angiography and optical coherence tomography measurements were evaluated in both groups. Follow-up visits out to three months from baseline are reported.

Results: One month after treatment, baseline foveal thickness decreased from 452 µ to 299 µ in the IVTA group and from 292 µ to 270 µ in the IVB group. BCVA increased by two or more lines in 58.3% of eyes in the IVTA group and there was no similar improvement in the IVB group. In the IVTA group, a transient increase in IOP (27-43 mmHg) occurred in four cases (16.7%), which was successfully controlled with topical medications. There were no complications in the IVB group.

Conclusion: Short term outcomes indicate that intravitreal injection of bevacizumab was not associated with surgical complications compared to triamcinolone acetonide. Triamcinolone acetonide appears to be more effective treatment for diabetic macular edema than bevacizumab.

Keywords: Bevacizumab; Diabetic Macular Edema; Intravitreal Triamcinolone; Retina; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor.