Panretinal photocoagulation versus intravitreal injection retreatment pain in higha-risk proliferative diabetic retinopathy

Célia Regina Farias De Araújo Lucena, José Afonso Ramos Filho, André Márcio Vieira Messias, José Aparecido Da Silva, Felipe Piacentini Paes De Almeida, Ingrid Ursula Scott, Jefferson Augusto Santana Ribeiro, Rodrigo Jorge

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To compare pain related to intravitreal injection and panretinal photocoagulationin the management of patients with higha-risk proliferative diabeticretinopathy. Methods: Prospective study including patients with high-risk proliferative diabeticretinopathy and no prior laser treatment randomly assigned to receive panretinal photocoagulation (PRP group) or panretinal photocoagulation plus intravitrealranibizumab (PRPplus group). In all patients, panretinal photocoagulation wasadministered in two sessions (weeks 0 and 2), and intravitreal ranibizumab wasadministered at the end of the first laser session in the PRPplus group. Retreatmentwas performed at weeks 16 and 32 if active new vessels were detected at fluoresceinangiography. Patients in the PRPplus group received intravitreal ranibizumaband patients in the PRP group received 500-μm additional spots per quadrant ofactive new vessels. After the end of retreatment, a 100-degree Visual Analog Scale was used for pain score estimation. The patient was asked about the intensity ofpain during the whole procedure (retinal photocoagulation session or intravitrealranibizumab injection). Statistics for pain score comparison were performed usinga nona-parametric test (Wilcoxon rank sums).Results: Seventeen patients from PRPplus and 14 from PRP group were evaluatedfor pain scores. There were no significant differences between both groups regardinggender, glycosylated hemoglobin and disease duration. Mean intravitrealinjection pain (±SEM) was 4.7 ± 2.1 and was significantly lower (p <0.0001) than mean panretinal photocoagulation pain (60.8 ± 7.8). Twelve out of 17 patientsfrom the PRPplus group referred intensity pain score of zero, while the minimalscore found in PRP group was found in one patient with 10.5.Conclusion: In patients with higha-risk proliferative diabetic retinopathy who neededretreatment for persistent new vessels, there was more comfort for the patientwhen retreatment was performed with an intravitreal injection in comparisonwith retinal photocoagulation. Further larger studies are necessary to confirmour preliminary findings.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)18-20
Number of pages3
JournalArquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia
Volume76
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 26 2013

Fingerprint

Intravitreal Injections
Retreatment
Light Coagulation
Diabetic Retinopathy
Pain
Nonparametric Statistics
Lasers
Referred Pain
Glycosylated Hemoglobin A
Visual Analog Scale
Prospective Studies
Injections

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Ophthalmology

Cite this

De Araújo Lucena, Célia Regina Farias ; Filho, José Afonso Ramos ; Messias, André Márcio Vieira ; Da Silva, José Aparecido ; De Almeida, Felipe Piacentini Paes ; Scott, Ingrid Ursula ; Ribeiro, Jefferson Augusto Santana ; Jorge, Rodrigo. / Panretinal photocoagulation versus intravitreal injection retreatment pain in higha-risk proliferative diabetic retinopathy. In: Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia. 2013 ; Vol. 76, No. 1. pp. 18-20.
@article{40766e8a3851489c94db234a5d5fcc3d,
title = "Panretinal photocoagulation versus intravitreal injection retreatment pain in higha-risk proliferative diabetic retinopathy",
abstract = "Purpose: To compare pain related to intravitreal injection and panretinal photocoagulationin the management of patients with higha-risk proliferative diabeticretinopathy. Methods: Prospective study including patients with high-risk proliferative diabeticretinopathy and no prior laser treatment randomly assigned to receive panretinal photocoagulation (PRP group) or panretinal photocoagulation plus intravitrealranibizumab (PRPplus group). In all patients, panretinal photocoagulation wasadministered in two sessions (weeks 0 and 2), and intravitreal ranibizumab wasadministered at the end of the first laser session in the PRPplus group. Retreatmentwas performed at weeks 16 and 32 if active new vessels were detected at fluoresceinangiography. Patients in the PRPplus group received intravitreal ranibizumaband patients in the PRP group received 500-μm additional spots per quadrant ofactive new vessels. After the end of retreatment, a 100-degree Visual Analog Scale was used for pain score estimation. The patient was asked about the intensity ofpain during the whole procedure (retinal photocoagulation session or intravitrealranibizumab injection). Statistics for pain score comparison were performed usinga nona-parametric test (Wilcoxon rank sums).Results: Seventeen patients from PRPplus and 14 from PRP group were evaluatedfor pain scores. There were no significant differences between both groups regardinggender, glycosylated hemoglobin and disease duration. Mean intravitrealinjection pain (±SEM) was 4.7 ± 2.1 and was significantly lower (p <0.0001) than mean panretinal photocoagulation pain (60.8 ± 7.8). Twelve out of 17 patientsfrom the PRPplus group referred intensity pain score of zero, while the minimalscore found in PRP group was found in one patient with 10.5.Conclusion: In patients with higha-risk proliferative diabetic retinopathy who neededretreatment for persistent new vessels, there was more comfort for the patientwhen retreatment was performed with an intravitreal injection in comparisonwith retinal photocoagulation. Further larger studies are necessary to confirmour preliminary findings.",
author = "{De Ara{\'u}jo Lucena}, {C{\'e}lia Regina Farias} and Filho, {Jos{\'e} Afonso Ramos} and Messias, {Andr{\'e} M{\'a}rcio Vieira} and {Da Silva}, {Jos{\'e} Aparecido} and {De Almeida}, {Felipe Piacentini Paes} and Scott, {Ingrid Ursula} and Ribeiro, {Jefferson Augusto Santana} and Rodrigo Jorge",
year = "2013",
month = "7",
day = "26",
doi = "10.1590/S0004-27492013000100006",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "76",
pages = "18--20",
journal = "Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia",
issn = "0004-2749",
publisher = "Conselho Brasileiro De Oftalmologia",
number = "1",

}

Panretinal photocoagulation versus intravitreal injection retreatment pain in higha-risk proliferative diabetic retinopathy. / De Araújo Lucena, Célia Regina Farias; Filho, José Afonso Ramos; Messias, André Márcio Vieira; Da Silva, José Aparecido; De Almeida, Felipe Piacentini Paes; Scott, Ingrid Ursula; Ribeiro, Jefferson Augusto Santana; Jorge, Rodrigo.

In: Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia, Vol. 76, No. 1, 26.07.2013, p. 18-20.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Panretinal photocoagulation versus intravitreal injection retreatment pain in higha-risk proliferative diabetic retinopathy

AU - De Araújo Lucena, Célia Regina Farias

AU - Filho, José Afonso Ramos

AU - Messias, André Márcio Vieira

AU - Da Silva, José Aparecido

AU - De Almeida, Felipe Piacentini Paes

AU - Scott, Ingrid Ursula

AU - Ribeiro, Jefferson Augusto Santana

AU - Jorge, Rodrigo

PY - 2013/7/26

Y1 - 2013/7/26

N2 - Purpose: To compare pain related to intravitreal injection and panretinal photocoagulationin the management of patients with higha-risk proliferative diabeticretinopathy. Methods: Prospective study including patients with high-risk proliferative diabeticretinopathy and no prior laser treatment randomly assigned to receive panretinal photocoagulation (PRP group) or panretinal photocoagulation plus intravitrealranibizumab (PRPplus group). In all patients, panretinal photocoagulation wasadministered in two sessions (weeks 0 and 2), and intravitreal ranibizumab wasadministered at the end of the first laser session in the PRPplus group. Retreatmentwas performed at weeks 16 and 32 if active new vessels were detected at fluoresceinangiography. Patients in the PRPplus group received intravitreal ranibizumaband patients in the PRP group received 500-μm additional spots per quadrant ofactive new vessels. After the end of retreatment, a 100-degree Visual Analog Scale was used for pain score estimation. The patient was asked about the intensity ofpain during the whole procedure (retinal photocoagulation session or intravitrealranibizumab injection). Statistics for pain score comparison were performed usinga nona-parametric test (Wilcoxon rank sums).Results: Seventeen patients from PRPplus and 14 from PRP group were evaluatedfor pain scores. There were no significant differences between both groups regardinggender, glycosylated hemoglobin and disease duration. Mean intravitrealinjection pain (±SEM) was 4.7 ± 2.1 and was significantly lower (p <0.0001) than mean panretinal photocoagulation pain (60.8 ± 7.8). Twelve out of 17 patientsfrom the PRPplus group referred intensity pain score of zero, while the minimalscore found in PRP group was found in one patient with 10.5.Conclusion: In patients with higha-risk proliferative diabetic retinopathy who neededretreatment for persistent new vessels, there was more comfort for the patientwhen retreatment was performed with an intravitreal injection in comparisonwith retinal photocoagulation. Further larger studies are necessary to confirmour preliminary findings.

AB - Purpose: To compare pain related to intravitreal injection and panretinal photocoagulationin the management of patients with higha-risk proliferative diabeticretinopathy. Methods: Prospective study including patients with high-risk proliferative diabeticretinopathy and no prior laser treatment randomly assigned to receive panretinal photocoagulation (PRP group) or panretinal photocoagulation plus intravitrealranibizumab (PRPplus group). In all patients, panretinal photocoagulation wasadministered in two sessions (weeks 0 and 2), and intravitreal ranibizumab wasadministered at the end of the first laser session in the PRPplus group. Retreatmentwas performed at weeks 16 and 32 if active new vessels were detected at fluoresceinangiography. Patients in the PRPplus group received intravitreal ranibizumaband patients in the PRP group received 500-μm additional spots per quadrant ofactive new vessels. After the end of retreatment, a 100-degree Visual Analog Scale was used for pain score estimation. The patient was asked about the intensity ofpain during the whole procedure (retinal photocoagulation session or intravitrealranibizumab injection). Statistics for pain score comparison were performed usinga nona-parametric test (Wilcoxon rank sums).Results: Seventeen patients from PRPplus and 14 from PRP group were evaluatedfor pain scores. There were no significant differences between both groups regardinggender, glycosylated hemoglobin and disease duration. Mean intravitrealinjection pain (±SEM) was 4.7 ± 2.1 and was significantly lower (p <0.0001) than mean panretinal photocoagulation pain (60.8 ± 7.8). Twelve out of 17 patientsfrom the PRPplus group referred intensity pain score of zero, while the minimalscore found in PRP group was found in one patient with 10.5.Conclusion: In patients with higha-risk proliferative diabetic retinopathy who neededretreatment for persistent new vessels, there was more comfort for the patientwhen retreatment was performed with an intravitreal injection in comparisonwith retinal photocoagulation. Further larger studies are necessary to confirmour preliminary findings.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84880409198&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84880409198&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1590/S0004-27492013000100006

DO - 10.1590/S0004-27492013000100006

M3 - Article

C2 - 23812521

AN - SCOPUS:84880409198

VL - 76

SP - 18

EP - 20

JO - Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia

JF - Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia

SN - 0004-2749

IS - 1

ER -