Background/aims: To evaluate the course of treatment and outcomes of neovascular glaucoma (NVG) treated with intravitreal bevacizumab.
Methods: The study is a retrospective, non-comparative, consecutive, interventional case series. Demographic data, past ocular history, cause of NVG and anterior chamber angle status were recorded. Visual acuity (VA), intraocular pressure (IOP), number of IOP-lowering medications and type of treatment administered were recorded at the time of NVG diagnosis and at follow-up intervals. Treatment-related complications and reasons for vision loss were recorded.
Results: The study included 56 eyes of 52 patients. At the time of NVG diagnosis, the median VA was count fingers, and the mean IOP (SD) was 40 (11) mm Hg. At 6 months after initial bevacizumab injection, the median VA was 1/200, and the mean IOP (SD) was 18 (15) mm Hg. Seventy-one per cent of eyes underwent panretinal photocoagulation after NVG diagnosis. Sixty-one per cent of eyes received a glaucoma drainage implant (GDI). The Kaplan–Meier cumulative proportion of eyes with open angles receiving a GDI after initial bevacizumab injection was not statistically significantly different from that of eyes with closed angles. Forty-six per cent of eyes received repeat bevacizumab injections. Eleven eyes had hyphaema after both bevacizumab injection and GDI surgery, while three eyes had hyphaema after GDI surgery but prior to initial bevacizumab injection.
Conclusions: Intravitreal bevacizumab is now a frequently used adjunct for the treatment of NVG. Eyes must be monitored closely after initial injection of intravitreal bevacizumab, regardless of intial angle status, as many may still require surgery to lower IOP or repeat injections of intravitreal bevacizumab.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Competing interests: PJR has received financial support and/or has been an advisor to Genentech, Regeneron, Zeiss Meditec and Neovista. The other authors have no financial interests in any of the products discussed in this article.
Funding: RKL is supported by NIH NEI grant EY016775. The Bascom Palmer Eye Institute is supported by an unrestricted research grant from Research to Prevent Blindness and NIH center grant EY014801.
Ethics approval: Ethics approval was provided by the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine Institutional Review Board.