View clinical trials related to Diabetic Macular Edema.
Filter by:This study will evaluate the pharmacokinetics, safety and efficacy of an intravitreal insert of fluocinolone acetonide for the treatment of diabetic macular edema
Efficacy duration of triamcinolone acetonide (steroid) for treatment of diabetic macular edema. Furthermore, dosage dependency of triamcinolone acetonide comparing a high dosage versus a low dosage.
Intravitreal triamcinolone has been effective for central macular thickness reduction and concomitant visual acuity improvement in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). VEGF is a very effective inducer of permeability, being 50.000 times more potent than histamine, and may exert its effect on retinal vascular permeability by altering tight-junctions proteins, such as occluding and VE-cadherin. Based on these principles, there is a rationale for anti-VEGF agents treatment of increased retinal capillary permeability conditions, such as diabetic macular edema. Therefore, we conducted a randomized, prospective study to compare the efficacy and safety of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide and intravitreal bevacizumab injection for refractory diffuse DME.
This study will evaluate the safety and efficacy of the intravitreal implant of dexamethasone with laser treatment vs. laser treatment alone in patients with diabetic macular edema.
Patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy or clinically significant diabetic macular edema requiring surgical intervention will receive a pre-operative injection of Macugen. An initial, pre-injection vitreous tap will be done in order to provide baseline VRGF 165 and cytokine levels. At the onset of the vitrectomy, a second vitreous sample will be taken to obtain intra-operative levels of Macugen, VEGF 165 and cytokines.
The purpose of the study is to find out if treatment with an intravitreal injection of triamcinolone or an intravitreal injection of ranibizumab can prevent loss of vision caused by panretinal photocoagulation treatment. At the present time, it is not known whether intravitreal steroid or anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections are beneficial in preventing vision loss after panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) treatment. It is possible that one or both of the types of injections will prevent vision loss after PRP treatment. However, it is not known whether the benefits of the injections will outweigh the risks. It is possible that because of side effects, the injections may not be as good as laser alone in treating the diabetic retinopathy.
The purpose of the study is to find out which is a better treatment for diabetic macular edema (DME): laser alone, laser combined with an intravitreal injection of triamcinolone, laser combined with an intravitreal injection of ranibizumab, or intravitreal injection of ranibizumab alone. At the present time, it is not known whether intravitreal steroid or anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections, with or without laser treatment, are better than just laser by itself. It is possible that one or both of the types of injections, with or without laser treatment, will improve vision more often than will laser without injections. However, even if better vision outcomes are seen with injections, side effects may be more of a problem with the injections than with laser. Therefore, this study is conducted to find out whether the benefits of the injections will outweigh the risks.
The study objective is to determine the course of changes in OCT measured macular thickness and visual acuity following a single session of focal photocoagulation for center-involved DME. The response will be evaluated separately in eyes with and without prior focal photocoagulation for DME. The purpose is to determine the proportion of eyes that continue to improve at least 5 letters in visual acuity or at least 10% in central retinal thickness after a session of focal photocoagulation. In addition, the study will explore whether any baseline factors can be identified that are predictive of the response. All subjects will have follow-up visits 8 weeks and 16 weeks post treatment. At the 16-week visit, study eyes are evaluated for change in retinal thickness and visual acuity from baseline. - Treatment is to be deferred and follow up continued if visual acuity letter score has improved by >5 or OCT central subfield thickness has decreased by >10% compared with baseline. - If visual acuity letter score has not improved by at least 5 and OCT central subfield thickness has not decreased by at least 10%, then the eye is classified as 'not improved' and the investigator may provide additional treatment. Follow up ends for eyes that receive additional treatment at this visit. However, if the investigator and participant elect to defer additional treatment (even if deferral criteria are not met), then follow up will continue until the study eye receives additional treatment for DME. - Eyes continuing in follow up have visits every 8 weeks (+1week) as long as there has been continued improvement in visual acuity (letter score improved >5 ) or retinal thickness (central subfield thickness decreased by >10%) compared with the visit 16 weeks earlier. The longest follow-up time will be 48 weeks. By providing information on the length of time during which clinically meaningful improvement occurs following focal photocoagulation, clinicians will be better able to determine when further photocoagulation or other treatments should be considered for persistent DME. Depending on the results of this study, a future randomized clinical trial will be considered comparing the more aggressive retreatment photocoagulation regimen currently serving as the standard DRCR Network approach to focal photocoagulation for macular edema with the less aggressive regimen evaluated in this protocol.
Intravitreal Bevacizumab is an effective treatment for the diffuse diabetic macular edema
A multicenter study to compare multiple doses of intravitreal microplasmin for non-surgical PVD induction for treatment of patients with DME.