Comparative Efficacy of Intravitreal Aflibercept and Dexamethasone Implant in Treating Macular Edema Associated with Diabetic Retinopathy or Retinal Vein Occlusion: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Authors

  • Khaled Moghib Fourth-year medical student, Cairo University/ Kasralainy Medical School, Cairo, Egypt https://orcid.org/0009-0004-9920-7075
  • Yumna Mahmoud Fourth-year medical student, Cairo University/ Kasralainy Medical School, Cairo, Egypt
  • Ayman Hassan Fourth-year medical student, Cairo University/ Kasralainy Medical School, Cairo, Egypt
  • Ammar Salah Fifth-year medical student. Faculty of Medicine, Al Azhar Asuit, Egypt

Keywords:

Meta-analysis, Diabetic retinopathy, macular edema, dexamethasone, aflibercept, best-corrected visual acuity, central retinal thickness

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) and retinal vein occlusion (RVO) are common retinal vascular diseases that can lead to visual impairment. Macular edema is a serious complication of both DR and RVO. Anti-VEGF agents like aflibercept and corticosteroids like dexamethasone implant are treatments for ME. We aim to evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of these two treatments for ME associated with DR or RVO.

METHOD: The databases used in the study for a literature search include PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials searched from inception till August 1, 2024. The aim was to include trials which addressed the efficacy and safety of treatments for macular edema. Data extraction was performed on key outcome variables which included the BCVA, CRT, the number of injections given and the SAE’s. The obtained data was subsequently analyzed qualitatively and quantitively based on the RevMan 5 software program. 3 software for meta- analysis of the included studies.

RESULTS: We included a total 8 of studies comprising 453 eyes. The underlying causes of macular edema in the included studies were RVO and DR. When comparing the dexamethasone implant group to the aflibercept treatment group, there was no statistically significant difference in BCVA at the 3M (MD: -0.00, 95% CI: -0.04,0.04; P=0.95),6M (MD: -0.02, 95% CI: -0.05, 0.02; P=0.43) and 12M (MD: -0.03, 95% CI: -0.07, 0.01; P=0.16). In terms of central retinal thickness reduction, there was a significant difference between the two groups at 3M (MD: -20.04, 95% CI: -34.52,-5.56; P=0.007), and 12M (MD:19.61, 95% CI: -37.4, -1.81; P=0.03), however, there was no significant result in 6M (MD: 2.07, 95% CI: - 15.4, 19.55; P=0.82).

CONCLUSION: The meta-analysis revealed that the aflibercept intravitreal injection and dexamethasone implant both significant in improving BCVA and decreasing the CRT of patients with DR and ME. In the initial 3 months of therapy as well as fixed-dose 12 months of therapy, dexamethasone implant was found to provide better vision and reduced CRT than aflibercept. Nevertheless, the dexamethasone implant needed less injection but increased the incidence of elevated intraocular pressure and cataract formation.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Bibliography

Yucel OE, Birinci H, Sullu Y. The short-term efficacy of intravitreal ranibizumab, aflibercept and dexamethasone implant in the treatment of macular edema due to non-ischemic central retinal vein occlusion. Int Ophthalmol. 2019 Apr;39(4):891–901.

Kaldırım HE, Yazgan S. A comparison of three different intravitreal treatment modalities of macular edema due to branch retinal vein occlusion. Int Ophthalmol. 2018 Aug;38(4):1549–58.

Ozsaygili C, Duru N. Comparison of intravitreal dexamethasone implant and aflibercept in patients with treatment-naive diabetic macular edema with serous retinal detachment. Retina (Philadelphia, Pa). 2020 Jun;40(6):1044–52.

Hanhart J, Rozenman Y. Comparison of Intravitreal Ranibizumab, Aflibercept, and Dexamethasone Implant after Bevacizumab Failure in Macular Edema Secondary to Retinal Vascular Occlusions. Ophthalmologica. 2017 May 24;238(1–2):110–8.

Comet A, Gascon P, Ramtohul P, Donnadieu B, Denis D, Matonti F. INVICTUS: Intravitreal anti-VEGF and dexamethasone implant comparison for the treatment of diabetic macular edema: A 12 months follow-up study. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2021 Mar;31(2):754–8.

Chakraborty D, Mondal S, Sengupta S, Maiti A, Boral S, Das A, et al. Aflibercept vs. dexamethasone implant for recalcitrant diabetic macular edema in pseudophakic eyes - 1-year outcomes from a quazi-randomized study in India. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2024 Jul 1;72(7):1001–6.

Aksoy M, Yilmaz G, Vardarli I, Akkoyun I. Choroidal Thickness After Dexamethasone Implant or Aflibercept in Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema Persistent to Ranibizumab. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther. 2020 Oct;36(8):629–35.

Bolukbasi S, Cakir A, Erden B, Karaca G. Comparison of the short-term effect of aflibercept and dexamethasone implant on serous retinal detachment in the treatment of naive diabetic macular edema. Cutan Ocul Toxicol. 2019 Dec;38(4):401–5.

Downloads

Published

2025-01-01

How to Cite

Moghib, K., Mahmoud, Y., Hassan, A., & Salah, A. (2025). Comparative Efficacy of Intravitreal Aflibercept and Dexamethasone Implant in Treating Macular Edema Associated with Diabetic Retinopathy or Retinal Vein Occlusion: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review. International Journal of Medical Students, 12, S336. Retrieved from https://ijms.pitt.edu/IJMS/article/view/2836

Issue

Vol 12. (2024): Supplement 1

Section

Abstracts of the WCMSR

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Khaled A.Moghib, Yumna, Ayman Hassan, Ammar Salah

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site; with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
    2. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
    3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
    4. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
    5. The Author represents and warrants that:
      1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
      2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
      3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
      4. the Work has not previously been published;
      5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
      6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
    6. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from the Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

Enforcement of copyright

The IJMS takes the protection of copyright very seriously.

If the IJMS discovers that you have used its copyright materials in contravention of the license above, the IJMS may bring legal proceedings against you seeking reparation and an injunction to stop you using those materials. You could also be ordered to pay legal costs.

If you become aware of any use of the IJMS' copyright materials that contravenes or may contravene the license above, please report this by email to contact@ijms.org

 

Infringing material

If you become aware of any material on the website that you believe infringes your or any other person's copyright, please report this by email to contact@ijms.org