Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion – Update on Treatment Options

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (01) ◽  
pp. 25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephan Michels ◽  
Magdalena Anna Wirth ◽  
◽  
◽  

The advent of new pharmacotherapeutic options and diagnostic methods have led to a revolution in the management of branch retinal vein occlusion over the past few years. Despite the variety of treatment options, we are confronted with several questions: which drug should we use? Is switching between or combining treatment options beneficial? What is the recommended treatment regimen? When should we start treatment and for how long should we continue it? Should we still use retinal laser therapy? The wide range of possibilities and emerging treatment choices not only aids, but also challenges clinicians striving for evidence-based management.

Branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) includes occlusion of major branch retinal vein, macular branch vein, and peripheral branch vein. BRVO is the second most common retinal vascular disease after diabetic retinopathy. Macular edema is the leading cause of visual loss related to BRVO. Although there are many treatment options, effective treatment applications are limited. Laser therapy is one of these applications; that is used both in the development of neovascularization and in the presence of macular edema. Grid laser therapy doesn’t take place as much as the former in the primary treatment of macular edema; that still continues efficiency in combined treatment and selected cases.


Author(s):  
M.S. Krivosheeva ◽  
◽  
E.E. Ioyleva ◽  

A clinical case of observation of a patient who had branch retinal vein occlusion with the development of macular edema, against the background of a moderate-severe course of COVID-19, was considered. The clinical picture and diagnostic methods necessary for the diagnosis are described. Some aspects of pathological changes in the organ of sight in COVID-19 are discussed. Key words: COVID-19, branch retinal vein occlusion, macular edema, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system.


Ophthalmology ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 117 (6) ◽  
pp. 1094-1101.e5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie L. Rogers ◽  
Rachel L. McIntosh ◽  
Lyndell Lim ◽  
Paul Mitchell ◽  
Ning Cheung ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jia Li ◽  
Yannis M. Paulus ◽  
Yuanlu Shuai ◽  
Wangyi Fang ◽  
Qinghuai Liu ◽  
...  

For years, branch retinal vein occlusion is still a controversial disease in many aspects. An increasing amount of data is available regarding classification, pathogenesis, risk factors, natural history, and therapy of branch retinal vein occlusion. Some of the conclusions may even change our impression of branch retinal vein occlusion. It will be beneficial for our doctors to get a deeper understanding of this disease and improve the treatment skills. The aims of this review is to collect the information above and report new ideas especially from the past a few years.


2002 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary C. Brown ◽  
Melissa M. Brown ◽  
Sanjay Sharma ◽  
Brandon Busbee ◽  
Heidi Brown

Retinal vein occlusion is the second most common retinal vascular disorder after diabetic retinopathy and is considered to be an important cause of visual loss. There are several treatment modalities for branch retinal vein occlusion and specifically for its complications, such as macular edema, vitreous hemorrhage, retinal neovascularization, and retinal detachment. These treatment modalities are anti-aggregative therapy and fibrinolysis, isovolemic hemodilution, vitrectomy with or without sheathotomy, peripheral scatter and macular grid retinal laser therapy, non-steroid agents, intravitreal steroids ( triamcinolone, and dexamethasone implants), and intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGFs) (bevacizumab, ranibizumab, aflibercept). In this review, the treatment modalities other than routinely performed anti-VEGF, steroid, and laser therapy in macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion and emerging therapies will be overviewed.


2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatsuya Yunoki ◽  
Keiichi Mitarai ◽  
Shuichiro Yanagisawa ◽  
Tsuyoshi Kato ◽  
Nobuo Ishida ◽  
...  

Purpose. To evaluate the effects of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) on recurrent macular edema due to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) after intravitreal injections of bevacizumab (IVB).Methods. This retrospective study included 22 eyes of 22 patients who underwent single or multiple IVB injections for macular edema due to BRVO and showed a recurrence of macular edema. All patients then underwent PPV and were followed up for more than 6 months after the surgery with examinations of best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and optical coherence tomography (OCT). OCT parameters were central macular thickness (CMT) and average retinal thickness in a 1-mm-diameter circular region at the fovea (MRT).Results. Mean BCVA, CRT, and MRT were significantly improved from the baseline after PPV. Greater improvement of BCVA, CRT, and MRT was obtained after 1 month of IVB than after 6 months of PPV. No eyes showed worsening of macular edema after the surgery.Conclusion. PPV improved BCVA and recurrent macular edema due to BRVO, but PPV that was less effective than IVB had been in the same patients. PPV may be one of the treatment options for recurrent macular edema due to BRVO after IVB.


2020 ◽  
pp. bjophthalmol-2019-315192
Author(s):  
Victor Albert Eng ◽  
Theodore Leng

Retinal vein occlusion is the second-leading cause of vision loss by retinal vascular disease. Subthreshold micropulse laser therapy (SLT) is safer than conventional laser photocoagulation (CLP), yet existing reviews of its use for branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) are limited in scope. A literature search of PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov databases was conducted in August 2019 without restriction on language or publication date. Outcomes included changes in macular oedema (ME) and visual acuity (VA), and rates of complications or retreatments. Fourteen studies involving 315–405 eyes diagnosed with BRVO were evaluated. Treatment with SLT is associated with significant and durable reduction of ME and VA as early as 1 month. SLT performs comparably with conventional photocoagulation and intravitreal injections (IVIs) of ranibizumab. Subthreshold laser therapy is safer and as effective as CLP for the treatment of ME associated with BRVO. SLT may be used in combination with anti-VEGF IVIs to enhance improvement in VA and ME resolution.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document