Different doses of verteporfin photodynamic therapy for central exudative chorioretinopathy / 中华实验眼科杂志

ABSTRACT

Background The dosage of verteporfin photodynamic therapy (PDT) for central exudative chorioretinopathy(CEC) depends on the calculation formula of Treatment of Age-related Macular Degeneration with Photodynamic Therapy Study Group(TAP)and Verteporfin in Photodynamic Therapy Study Group(VIP).Some local adverse responses or normal tissue damage have been noted under the standard dose of verteporfin during the treatment of CEC.So it is necessary to explore an appropriate therapeutic dosage of verteporfin.Objective This clinical study aimed to observe and compare the clinical efficacy and safety of different doses of verteporfin PDT for CEC.Methods Ninety eyes of 90 patients with CEC were enrolled in this study with the approval of the Ethic Commission of Affiliated Second Hospital of Nanchang University.Written informed consent was obtained before PDT.The patients were randomly divided into standard dose group,half dose group and 1/3 dose group.All of the patients received PDT.Standard dose(6 mg/m2),3 mg/m2 or 2 mg/m2 of verteporfin was applied in the three groups respectively,with the laser intensity 50 J/cm2.The patients were followed-up for 3 months.Repeat treating regimen was performed in the same way in the patient with fundus fluorescein leakage after initial PDT.Results The BCVA(logMAR) value was 0.44±0.36 after PDT in the standard dose group.Visual acuity improved in 20 patients (66.67％),stabilized in 8 patients(26.67％)and decreased in 2 patients (6.67％).The BCVA showed a significant difference between the preoperative and postoperative BCVA (t =6.719,P =0.000).CNV disappeared in 19 patients (63.33％),obviously improved in 7 patients (23.33％),partially disappeared in 3 patients (10.00％) and unchanged in 1 patient (3.33％).The central fovea thickness (CFT)value was significantly declined in postoperation compared with preoperation (t =5.758,P =0.000).Eight patients received secondary PDT with the recurrence rate 26.67％.In the half dose group,visual acuity improved in 18 patients(60.00％),stabilized in 11 patients(36.67％)and decreased in 1 patient (3.33％).CNV disappeared in 16 patients (53.33％),obviously improved in 8 patients (26.67％),partially disappeared in 5 patients (16.67％) and unchanged in 1 patient (3.33 ％).Significant difference was seen between the preoperative BCVA and postoperative BCVA(t=8.294,P =0.000).The decrease of C FT was significant in postoperation(t =8.493,P =0.000).Ten patients received secondary treatment with the recurrence rate 33.33％.In 1/3 dose group,visual acuity improved in 8 patients (26.67 ％),stabilized in 12 patients (40.00％),decreased in 10 patient (33.3％).CNV disappeared in 8 patients (26.67％),obviously improved in 8 patients (26.67％),partially disappeared in 6 patients (20.00％) and unchanged in 8 patient (26.67％).There was no significant difference between the preoperative BCVA and postoperative BCVA (t =0.536,P =0.596).The difference between preoperative CFT and postoperative CFT was insignificant(t =0.942,P=0.354).Fourteen patients received secondary PDT and 8 patients received three times with the recurrence rate 73.33％.Conclusions 3 mg/m2 verteporfin PDT for CEC shows a similar clinical efficiency and safety to 6 mg/m2 verteporfin.3 mg/m2 verteporfin PDT can decrease cost,but the effect of 2 mg/m2verteporfin PDT is not satisfacted.