Browsing by Author "Mansour, A.M."
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Bevacizumab versus ziv-aflibercept in branch retinal vein occlusion(Indian Journal of Ophthalmology, 2019-07-07) Braimah, I.Z.; Singh, S.R.; Uplanchiwar, B.; Mansour, A.M.; Chhablani, J.PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of treatment with intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) and ziv-aflibercept (IVZ) in patients with macular edema (ME) post-branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO). METHODS: Patients with treatment naïve ME post-BRVO were included retrospectively if they received either IVB (0.05 ml/1.25 mg) or IVZ (0.05 ml/1.25 mg) monotherapy with a follow up of 12 months. RESULTS: Thirty-two and 17 eyes received IVB and IVZ, respectively. The mean improvement in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was 0.36 ± 0.3 logarithm of minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) in the IVB group and 0.27 ± 0.3 in the IVZ group (P = 0.35). The mean change in central macular thickness was 178.9 ± 180.9 and 173.5 ± 344.4 μm in IVB and IVZ groups, respectively (P = 0.94). The mean number of injections was higher in the IVB group (4.0 ± 1.8) compared with 1.82 ± 0.8 in the IVZ group (P < 0.0001). The IVZ group had significantly fewer number of visits (P < 0.0001) and longer maximum treatment-free intervals (P = 0.0081). CONCLUSION: IVZ appears to be cost-effective with the similar visual outcome and less number of visits in comparison to IVB.Item Safety of 5914 intravitreal ziv-aflibercept injections(British Journal of Ophthalmology, 2018-07-02) Braimah, I.Z.; Singh, S.R.; Stewart, M.W.; Chattannavar, G.; Ashraf, M.; Souka, A.; ElDardeery, M.; Wadhwa, N.; Sarvaiya, C.; Mansour, A.M.; Marashi, A.; Ramchandani, S.; Bonyadi, M.H.J.; Ramezani, A.; Soheilian, M.; de Oliveira Dias, J.; de Andrade, G.C.; Maia, A.; Rodrigues, E.B.; Farah, M.E.; Banker, A.; Chhablani, J.Purpose To analyse the pooled safety data of intravitreal ziv-aflibercept (IVZ) therapy for various retinal conditions. Methods This was a retrospective, observational study which included patients from 14 participating centres who received IVZ. The medical records of patients who received IVZ from March 2015 through October 2017 were evaluated. Patient demographics and ocular details were compiled. Ocular and systemic adverse events that occurred within 1 month of IVZ injections were recorded and defined as either procedure-related or drug-related. Results A total of 1704 eyes of 1562 patients received 5914 IVZ injections (mean±SD: 3.73±3.94) during a period of 2.5 years. The age of patients was 60.6±12.8 years (mean±SD) and included diverse chorioretinal pathologies. Both ocular (one case of endophthalmitis, three cases of intraocular inflammation, and one case each of conjunctival thinning/necrosis and scleral nodule) and systemic adverse events (two cases of myocardial infarction, one case of stroke and two deaths) were infrequent. Conclusion This constitutes the largest pooled safety report on IVZ use and includes patients from 14 centres distributed across the globe. It shows that IVZ has an acceptable ocular and systemic safety profile with incidences of adverse events similar to those of other vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitory drugs. The analysis supports the continued use of IVZ in various retinal disorders.