Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

OSI-906-Chick Has Confirmed Contemporary Formula : Steps To Making A King's Ransom On Your Own

Therefore, the results of this 6-month follow-up, non-randomized study suggest that treatment with an initial loading phase (three?monthly injections; thereafter as required) currently provides the best management of AMD. As in the study of Fong et?al. (2008), all patients in the present study received an LD of three this website injections in the initial treatment phase, whereas the previously reported longer-term follow-up studies used individually determined reinjection requirements after the first injection in the initial treatment phase, based on the presence of persistent leakage and retinal oedema (Arevalo et?al. 2008; Bashshur et?al. 2008; Cleary et?al. 2008). In the present study, we adopted the PrONTO study strategy (Fung et?al. 2007): after three consecutive monthly injections of anti-VEGF, further retreatment was based on the criteria proposed by the PrONTO study. Instead of ranibizumab we used bevacizumab, because it was the only anti-VEGF available in Slovenia at that time. Intravitreal bevacizumab proved to be an effective treatment for wet AMD: its use prevented moderate vision loss (as defined by a loss of >?15 letters) in 95.5% of patients at 12?months, which is similar to the results of the PrONTO study (Table?3). In the present study, after LD the majority of patients (72.4%) either retained their initial VA or improved VA by <?15 letters. In contrast, in the PrONTO study the majority of patients (77.5%) gained 15�C30 letters <a href="">ABT-737 after LD. As can be seen from Table?3, these proportions remained after 12?months. The better results reported for ranibizumab may be due, in part, to the stricter inclusion criteria of the PrONTO study. In our study, we included patients with all subtypes of lesion, including lesions with subfoveal fibrosis. The latter, for example, was one of the exclusion criteria in the PrONTO study. A subgroup analysis selleck compound of our patients revealed no improvement of VA in patients with subfoveal fibrosis. The possibility that the better results observed with ranibizumab might be caused by a greater affinity of ranibizumab for VEGF cannot be excluded. The effect of bevacizumab on VA observed in the present study is similar to the results observed by Fong et?al. (2008), who also treated patients with bevacizumab according to the PrONTO strategy. The distribution of VA changes presented in Table?3 indicates that 61.5% of their patients either retained their initial VA or gained <?15 letters after 6?months, compared with 65.1% in the present study. In contrast to the PrONTO study, which reported results of 40 eyes at 3- and 12-month follow-ups, and the study of Fong et?al. (2008)�C which reported results of 109 eyes at 3- and 6-month follow-ups, but only 41 eyes at the 12-month follow-up �C the present study reports results of 149, 143 and 132 eyes at 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-ups, respectively (Table?3). Fong et?al. (2008) reported a mean VA increase of 5.</div>
Sign In or Register to comment.