Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2015 Jun;35(3):421-8.
doi: 10.1007/s10792-014-9967-z. Epub 2014 Jul 19.

Intravitreal diclofenac versus intravitreal bevacizumab in naive diabetic macular edema: a randomized double-masked clinical trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Intravitreal diclofenac versus intravitreal bevacizumab in naive diabetic macular edema: a randomized double-masked clinical trial

Masoud Soheilian et al. Int Ophthalmol. 2015 Jun.

Abstract

The purpose of the study is to compare single injection of intravitreal diclofenac (IVD) with intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) in the treatment of eyes with naïve diabetic macular edema (DME). In this randomized clinical trial, 57 eyes of 57 patients were randomly assigned to IVD group (30 eyes), cases who received a single intravitreal injection of diclofenac (500 μg/0.1 ml), and IVB group (27 eyes), cases who received a single intravitreal injection of bevacizumab (1.25 mg). Change in best-corrected visual acuity in logMAR at week 12 was the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcomes included changes in central macular thickness, macular leakage, and potential injection-related complications. Best-corrected visual acuity improved significantly more in the IVD group than in the IVB group (P = 0.033), from 0.57 ± 0.25 to 0.49 ± 0.31 versus 0.55 ± 0.24-0.59 ± 0.27 logMAR at 12 weeks, respectively. However, the difference of macular thickness changes was in favor of IVB, but not to a significant level. The amount of change in leakage was not significantly different between the groups either. None of the eyes, in either group, developed ocular hypertension (≥23 mmHg) or cataract progression. No important injection-related complication was observed during the study period. This study demonstrated the superiority of IVD over IVB in the treatment of naïve DME regarding functional, but not anatomical outcomes. Therefore, using IVD as an adjunct or even alternative to other treatments might enhance the functional outcomes in such cases. Further studies are warranted to confirm potential benefit of IVD observed in this study.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2010 Jul-Aug;73(4):338-42 - PubMed
    1. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1985 Oct;26(10):1336-42 - PubMed
    1. Ophthalmology. 2010 Jun;117(6):1078-1086.e2 - PubMed
    1. Acta Ophthalmol. 2010 Dec;88(8):896-900 - PubMed
    1. Pharm Res. 2009 May;26(5):1236-60 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources