View clinical trials related to Macular Edema.
Filter by:The study will compare the safety of ophthalmic bevacizumab in vials versus pre-filled syringes in subjects diagnosed with a retinal condition that would benefit from treatment with intravitreal injection of bevacizumab, including: exudative age-related macular degeneration, diabetic macular edema, or branch retinal vein occlusion.
This study is a double-blind randomized clinical trial in Diabetic patients (type 2) over 18 years of age who have diabetic macular edema with involvement of the central 1 millimeter (central macular thickness is more than 300 μm) and BCVA 20/30 or less who visit the retina clinic of Labbafinejad Hospital Are studied. (In patients with bilateral macular edema, only one eye is included in the study.) Complete ocular examinations (including best corrected visual acuity - anterior segment - intraocular pressure - dilated pupil funduscopy with severity of diabetic retinopathy), optical coherence tomography (OCT), EDI-OCT( Enhanced Depth Imaging Optical Coherence Tomography ) - as well as Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA ) are performed for all patients at baseline. Blood tests are also taken from patients for fasting blood sugar and HbA1C. Patients are then randomly divided into two groups. The first group is treated with injections of 1.25 mg of intravitreal bevacizumab monthly for 3 months (months 0, 1 and 2) with topical drops of Timolol twice a day and Dorzolamide twice a day. For the second group (control group), 3 injections of 1.25 mg of intravitreal bevacizumab monthly with artificial tears (twice a day as a placebo) are prescribed. Patients in both groups are visited 1 month after the third basic intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injection and complete ophthalmology examinations are performed and central thickness of macula is recorded based on the patient's OCT as well as the need for IVB re-injection. EDI (Enhanced Depth Imaging)-OCT and OCTA are performed again for all patients.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of OCS-01 ophthalmic suspension versus vehicle alone in subjects with DME
Retinal vein occlusion (RVO) is one of the most common causes of vision loss due to retinal vascular disease. Incidence of RVO has been raised in the last years due to increased coexisting systemic vascular risk factors as arterial hypertension, obesity, diabetes mellitus and COVID-19. Macular edema (ME) is a major sight-threatening complication of branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) and central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO). BRVO and CRVO have the same pathology, an elevation in the intravascular pressure in the occluded vein leading to vascular wall damage causing leakage of fluid and release of inflammatory cytokines as vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), respectively. In the past, the standard treatment for BRVO-related ME was grid laser photocoagulation and for CRVO-related ME was observation. But subsequent randomized controlled trials demonstrated significant functional and anatomical improvements among patients with ME secondary to BRVO or CRVO treated with intravitreal injections of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors or corticosteroids compared to those treated with laser only. Anti-VEGF therapy decrease intravenous pressure, enhance blood flow and improve venous diameter and tortuosity. Also, intravitreal corticosteroid injection has been shown to improve vision and central macular thickness (CMT). Dexamethasone intravitreal implant (Ozurdex®, Allergan Inc., Irvine, CA, USA) has potent antiangiogenic and anti-inflammatory effects. Also it decreases the vascular permeability playing an important role in treating ME secondary to RVO. However, majority of eyes have been treated previously then shifted to dexamethasone implant as a second line for treatment of refractory RVO related ME.
Primary objective of our study is the development and validation of an application for smart-TVs for the self-examination of the distant visual acuity of patients diagnosed with macular edema.
Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is characterized by intermittent nocturnal hypoxemia, frequent arousals, fragmented sleep and daytime sleepiness. It has been shown to increase the risk of cardiac and vascular disease through multiple mechanisms including sympathetic hyperactivity, metabolic dysregulation, and activation of oxidative stress and inflammatory pathways. Diabetic retinopathy is a leading cause of blindness in the working age group, affecting 93 million people worldwide. Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a sight threatening complication and the most common cause of visual loss in patients with diabetes. OSA is frequently associated with diabetes with prevalence ranging from 23 to 86%. However, the relationship between OSA and DME is not well defined. The retina is especially susceptible to hypoxia, being one of the most metabolically active tissues. Many of the same inflammatory mediators have also been found to be elevated in patients with diabetic macular edema, including VEGF, VCAM-1 and IL-6. There has been no previous study examining the biochemical impact of OSA on patients with DME. We aim to explore this relationship by examining the differences in inflammatory markers expressed in patients with DME who have undergone an overnight sleep study, which is considered the gold standard diagnostic tool in OSA.
This study is a prospective, non-interventional, multicenter, open-label study in nAMD and DME patients being treated with brolucizumab according to the EU SmPC. An observational study design, without a strict, mandated visit schedule or mandated treatment regimen was chosen as the most appropriate to collect available data in a real life setting. For that reason, this NIS does not impose a therapy protocol, diagnostic/therapeutic procedure or a visit schedule. The diagnostic or monitoring procedures are only those ordinarily applied to the therapeutic strategy and to routine clinical care and will take place as per investigator's discretion. This includes e.g. visit frequency, injection frequency and types of assessments performed - only data from routine medical practice will be collected as part of the study.
This is a randomized, masked, active-controlled, parallel-group, multi-center study that will assess the efficacy of ILUVIEN as a baseline therapy in the treatment of Center Involving DME (CI-DME). The study will enroll patients who are either treatment naïve or have not received any DME treatments for the preceding 12 months as documented in medical records. Patients who received DME treatment >12 months before screening, must not have received >4 intravitreal injections. The study will compare 2 treatment regimens: ILUVIEN intravitreal implant (0.19 mg) followed by supplemental aflibercept as needed per protocol criteria (2 mg/0.05 mL), compared to intravitreal aflibercept loading dose (2 mg administered by intravitreal injection every 4 weeks for 5 consecutive doses) followed by supplemental aflibercept as needed per protocol criteria (2 mg/0.05 mL).
The primary objective of the study is to determine if treatment with high-dose aflibercept (HD) at intervals of 12 or 16 weeks provides non-inferior best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) compared to aflibercept dosed every 8 weeks. The secondary objectives of the study are as follows: - To determine the effect of HD vs. aflibercept on anatomic and other visual measures of response - To evaluate the safety, immunogenicity, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of aflibercept
The containment associated with the VIDOC-19 pandemic creates an unprecedented societal situation of physical and social isolation. Our hypothesis is that in patients with chronic diseases, confinement leads to changes in health behaviours, adherence to pharmacological treatment, lifestyle rules and increased psychosocial stress with an increased risk of deterioration in their health status in the short, medium and long term. Some messages about the additional risk/danger associated with taking certain drugs in the event of COVID disease have been widely disseminated in the media since March 17, 2020, the date on which containment began in France. This is the case, for example, for corticosteroids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs but also for converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE inhibitors) and angiotensin II receptor antagonists (ARBs2). These four major classes of drugs are widely prescribed in patients with chronic diseases, diseases specifically selected in our study (corticosteroids: haematological malignancies, multiple sclerosis, Horton's disease; ACE inhibitors/ARAs2: heart failure, chronic coronary artery disease). Aspirin used at low doses as an anti-platelet agent in coronary patients as a secondary prophylaxis after a myocardial infarction can be stopped by some patients who consider aspirin to be a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug. Discontinuation of this antiplatelet agent, which must be taken for life after an infarction, exposes the patient to a major risk of a new cardiovascular event. The current difficulty of access to care due to travel restrictions (a theoretical limit in the context of French confinement but a priori very real), the impossibility of consulting overloaded doctors, or the cancellation of medical appointments, medical and surgical procedures due to the reorganization of our hospital and private health system to better manage COVID-19 patients also increases the risk of worsening the health status of chronic patients who by definition require regular medical monitoring. Eight Burgundian cohorts of patients with chronic diseases (chronic coronary artery disease, heart failure, multiple sclerosis, Horton's disease, AMD, haemopathic malignancy, chronic respiratory failure (idiopathic fibrosis, PAH) haemophilia cohort) will study the health impact of the containment related to the COVID-19 pandemic.