View clinical trials related to Retinal Vein Occlusion.
Filter by:Comparison of high-resolution optical coherence tomography (High-Res-OCT) to conventional imaging modalities for the diagnosis of eye diseases
This is a randomized, double-masked, multicenter, study to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of IRX-101 versus 5% povidone-iodine (PI) in subjects receiving intravitreal anti-VEGF injections. The study will be conducted in up to 30 centers in the United States (US).
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.
Patients who respond to anti-VEGF therapy but with refractory retinal and choroidal neovascularization diseases including neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), diabetic macular edema (DME), and retinal vein occlusion-Macular edema (RVO-ME).
This prospective non-randomized open-label interventional study aimed to evaluate feasibility in regard to potential efficacy and safety of triamcinolone acetonide (TA) injected in the suprachoroidal space (SCS) as a promising therapeutic route that provides a better bioavailability, longer sustained duration of action, and thus improved patients' compliance for the treatment of macular edema due to retinal vein occlusion (RVO).
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.
This pilot study aims to establish that treatment with near infrared light (NIR) reduces cystic macular oedema in patients with a retinal vein occlusion.
To compare the effect of intravitreal-Bevacizumab and Triamcinolone with intravitreal-Bevacizumab alone on visual acuity and central foveal thickness in patients with macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion.
Central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) is the second most common retinal vascular disease after diabetic retinopathy. It induces circulatory slowdown and blood stasis, which can appear as retinal hemorrhages. CRVO has been classically separated into two clinical forms: ischemic CVRO (possibly associated with cotton wool spots) and non-ischemic CRVO, the former being considered the most serious due to neovascular complications. More recently, a new classification has been suggested by Pierru et al. distinguishing two types of CRVO: type A characterized by low acute blood flow and type B with a slower onset. Type A is particularly associated with younger age, the presence of acute paracentral middle maculopathy, concomitant cilioretinal artery occlusion, and/or pulsatile arterial filling. Type B is more likely to occur in elderly patients, usually with high blood pressure, and multiple hemorrhages are frequently found on fundus examination. A retrospective study had shown a slight difference in favor of pulsatile CRVO in terms of the number of intravitreal anti-angiogenic injections required to treat macular edema and visual acuity changes. However, no statistically significant difference was observed. The objective of this study is to prospectively investigate whether spontaneous retinal artery pulses (SPARs) in patients with type A or B CRVO can be considered as a prognostic factor for the evolution of CRVO.
This is a Phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-masked, active comparator-controlled, parallel-group study evaluating the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of faricimab administered by intravitreal (IVT) injection at 4-week intervals until Week 24, followed by a double-masked period of study without active control to evaluate faricimab administered according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen in patients with macular edema due to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) or hemiretinal vein occlusion (HRVO).