Therapeutic Effects of Combination Therapy and Photobiomodulation Therapy on Retinal Regeneration.

Introduction: Many systemic and ocular diseases cause macular edema (ME). Macular edema is seen in two primary forms; the first is diffuse thickening of the macula, and the other is a macula with a distinct petaloid (cloverleaf) appearance called cystoid macular edema. Macular edema has a known role in the reduction of visual equity, and many options have been proposed for the reversal of this condition. Methods: Articles on the effects of macular laser grid photocoagulation on diabetic macular edema (DME) or cystoid macular edema published between 2000 and 2022 were collected from PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science. The following keywords were used for the search: "macular laser photocoagulation", "macular edema", "cystoid macular edema", "intravitreal pharmacotherapies", and "antivascular endothelial growth factor". Two hundred nineteen articles were found in google scholar and 165 articles in PubMed, and a total of 58 articles were included in the study after applying the exclusion criteria. Results: We investigated the effects of various lasers photocoagulation such as Focal and/or grid macular laser, subthreshold micropulse laser (SMPL), as well as intravitreal pharmacotherapies with triamcinolone acetonide, and fluocinolone, and extended released intraocular implants such as Ozurdex, Retisert, Iluvien, and anti-vascular endothelial growth factors such as bevacizumab (Avastin), Eyela, and Lucentis. Corticosteroids were more effective than lasers, although some researchers have found that lasers and combined lasers and corticosteroids are more effective. In addition, some studies have shown that the frequency and concentrations of intravitreal pharmacotherapies are effective in increasing visual outcomes. Conclusion: The results of the studies showed that the combined intravitreal corticosteroids are much more effective in improving visual acuity (VA) than a single corticosteroid, and the low concentration of the drug is safer. Still, corticosteroids have side effects such as increased intraocular pressure and glaucoma. Therefore, combining the medication with a laser is much more reasonable than each alone. Also, the subthreshold photocoagulation laser (670 nm) is better at reducing the central macular thickness (CMT) and improving VA than the micro pulse yellow laser and pan-retinal photocoagulation (PRP).

Comparison of photocoagulation with combined intravitreal triamcinolone for diabetic macular edema.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy between macular laser grid (MLG) photocoagulation and MLG plus intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA; MLG+IVTA) therapy in diabetic macular edema (DME) patients. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, clinical trial was conducted of DME patients. A total of 60 eyes (54 patients) affected by DME were observed for a minimum of 6 months. Thirty eyes of 28 patients who received MLG treatment and 30 eyes of 26 patients who received the combined MLG+IVTA treatment were included in the study. Main outcome measures were BCVA and central macular thickness (CMT) as measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT) at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment. Additionally, the authors examined retrospectively 20 eyes of 20 patients who were treated with only IVTA and compared with the 2 groups (MLG group and MLG+IVTA group). RESULTS: Baseline BCVA was 0.53 + or - 0.32 and CMT was 513.9 + or - 55.1 microm in the MLG group. At 1 and 3 months after treatment, the MLG group showed no significant improvement of BCVA and CMT, although there was significant improvement after 6 months. In the MLG+IVTA group, the baseline BCVA was 0.59 + or - 0.29 and CMT was 498.2 + or - 19.8 microm. After treatment, significant improvement of BCVA and CMT was observed at all follow-up time periods. When comparing the MLG group with the MLG+IVTA group, the latter had better results after 1 and 3 months, although at 6 months, there was no significant difference of BCVA and CMT between the 2 groups. Additionally, the IVTA group showed more improvement than the MLG group at 1 and 3 months but showed no significant difference at 6 months. In addition, the IVTA group showed no significant difference with the MLG+IVTA group at all follow-up time periods. CONCLUSIONS: For DME patients, the combined MLG+IVTA treatment had a better therapeutic effect than the MLG treatment for improving BCVA and CMT at the early follow-up time periods. IVTA treatment alone could be an additional alternative therapeutic option to combined therapy.

Comparison of Photocoagulation With Combined Intravitreal Triamcinolone for Diabetic Macular Edema

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy between macular laser grid (MLG) photocoagulation and MLG plus intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA; MLG+IVTA) therapy in diabetic macular edema (DME) patients. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, clinical trial was conducted of DME patients. A total of 60 eyes (54 patients) affected by DME were observed for a minimum of 6 months. Thirty eyes of 28 patients who received MLG treatment and 30 eyes of 26 patients who received the combined MLG+IVTA treatment were included in the study. Main outcome measures were BCVA and central macular thickness (CMT) as measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT) at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment. Additionally, the authors examined retrospectively 20 eyes of 20 patients who were treated with only IVTA and compared with the 2 groups (MLG group and MLG+IVTA group). RESULTS: Baseline BCVA was 0.53+/-0.32 and CMT was 513.9+/-55.1 microm in the MLG group. At 1 and 3 months after treatment, the MLG group showed no significant improvement of BCVA and CMT, although there was significant improvement after 6 months. In the MLG+IVTA group, the baseline BCVA was 0.59+/-0.29 and CMT was 498.2+/-19.8 microm. After treatment, significant improvement of BCVA and CMT was observed at all follow-up time periods. When comparing the MLG group with the MLG+IVTA group, the latter had better results after 1 and 3 months, although at 6 months, there was no significant difference of BCVA and CMT between the 2 groups. Additionally, the IVTA group showed more improvement than the MLG group at 1 and 3 months but showed no significant difference at 6 months. In addition, the IVTA group showed no significant difference with the MLG+IVTA group at all follow-up time periods. CONCLUSIONS: For DME patients, the combined MLG+IVTA treatment had a better therapeutic effect than the MLG treatment for improving BCVA and CMT at the early follow-up time periods. IVTA treatment alone could be an additional alternative therapeutic option to combined therapy.