Copyright
©The Author(s) 2022.
World J Diabetes. Jul 15, 2022; 13(7): 532-542
Published online Jul 15, 2022. doi: 10.4239/wjd.v13.i7.532
Published online Jul 15, 2022. doi: 10.4239/wjd.v13.i7.532
Table 1 Baseline data between the two groups
Baseline data | Compaq group (n = 48) | Ranibizumab group (n = 48) | t/χ2 value | P value |
Age (yr) | 64.8 ± 7.2 | 66.3 ± 6.9 | -1.042 | 0.300 |
BMI (kg/m2) | 23.5 ± 2.3 | 23.2 ± 2.8 | 0.574 | 0.568 |
Before treatment: BCVA (LogMAR) | 0.78 ± 0.12 | 0.80 ± 0.11 | -0.851 | 0.397 |
Gender, n (%) | 2.043 | 0.153 | ||
Male | 27 (56.25) | 20 (41.67) | ||
Female | 21 (43.75) | 28 (58.33) | ||
Distribution of affected side, n (%) | 0.667 | 0.414 | ||
Left | 22 (45.83) | 26 (54.17) | ||
Right | 26 (54.17) | 22 (45.83) |
Table 2 Comparison of estimated values of best corrected visual acuity, intraocular pressure between the two groups (mean ± SD)
Groups | BCVA (LogMAR) | IOP (mmHg) | ||||
Before treatment | 1 mo after treatment | 3 mo after treatment | Before treatment | 1 mo after treatment | 3 mo after treatment | |
Compaq group (n = 48) | 0.78 ± 0.12 | 0.72 ± 0.13 | 0.51 ± 0.10 | 16.84 ± 2.77 | 16.40 ± 2.81 | 16.39 ± 2.64 |
Ranibizumab group (n = 48) | 0.80 ± 0.11 | 0.75 ± 0.14 | 0.57 ± 0.13 | 16.50 ± 2.80 | 16.72 ± 2.76 | 16.81 ± 2.82 |
t value | -0.851 | -1.088 | -2.535 | 0.598 | -0.563 | -0.753 |
P value | 0.397 | 0.279 | 0.013 | 0.551 | 0.575 | 0.453 |
Table 3 Comparison of estimated values of macular retinal thickness, macular choroidal thickness, foveal no perfusion area between the two groups (mean ± SD)
Groups | Before treatment | 1 mo after treatment | 3 mo after treatment |
CMT (μm) | |||
Compaq group (n = 48) | 445.8 ± 89.6 | 372.1 ± 76.0 | 210.6 ± 66.4 |
Ranibizumab group (n = 48) | 452.7 ± 93.2 | 384.0 ± 80.6 | 243.1 ± 73.5 |
t value | -0.370 | -0.744 | -2.273 |
P value | 0.712 | 0.459 | 0.025 |
SFCT (μm) | |||
Compaq group (n = 48) | 335.1 ± 55.9 | 323.4 ± 59.5 | 281.6 ± 54.0 |
Ranibizumab group (n = 48) | 340.5 ± 58.3 | 330.5 ± 63.0 | 306.2 ± 57.3 |
t value | -0.463 | -0.568 | -2.165 |
P value | 0.644 | 0.572 | 0.033 |
FAZ (mm2) | |||
Compaq group (n = 48) | 0.74 ± 0.10 | 0.72 ± 0.12 | 0.73 ± 0.11 |
Ranibizumab group (n = 48) | 0.75 ± 0.12 | 0.74 ± 0.14 | 0.74 ± 0.11 |
t value | -0.444 | -0.751 | -0.445 |
P value | 0.658 | 0.454 | 0.657 |
Table 4 Comparison of vascular density in the shallow capillary plexus between the two groups (mean ± SD, %)
Groups | Before treatment | 1 mo after treatment | 3 mo after treatment |
Fovea | |||
Compaq group (n = 48) | 20.64 ± 4.40 | 20.30 ± 3.95 | 20.28 ± 3.77 |
Ranibizumab group (n = 48) | 20.90 ± 4.83 | 20.48 ± 4.20 | 20.37 ± 4.14 |
t value | -0.276 | -0.216 | -0.111 |
P value | 0.783 | 0.829 | 0.912 |
Parafovea | |||
Compaq group (n = 48) | 38.56 ± 4.82 | 38.10 ± 4.50 | 37.73 ± 4.72 |
Ranibizumab group (n = 48) | 39.10 ± 5.57 | 38.67 ± 5.53 | 38.38 ± 5.28 |
t value | -0.508 | -0.554 | -0.636 |
P value | 0.613 | 0.581 | 0.526 |
Overall macular area | |||
Compaq group (n = 48) | 35.74 ± 5.10 | 35.43 ± 4.85 | 34.92 ± 5.51 |
Ranibizumab group (n = 48) | 36.30 ± 5.34 | 35.67 ± 5.11 | 34.58 ± 5.18 |
t value | -0.525 | -0.236 | 0.311 |
P value | 0.601 | 0.814 | 0.756 |
Table 5 Comparison of vascular density in the deep capillary plexus between the two groups (mean ± SD, %)
Groups | Before treatment | 1 mo after treatment | 3 mo after treatment |
Fovea | |||
Compaq group (n = 48) | 18.58 ± 3.80 | 18.23 ± 3.75 | 17.86 ± 4.12 |
Ranibizumab group (n = 48) | 19.14 ± 4.00 | 18.78 ± 4.24 | 18.47 ± 3.96 |
t value | -0.703 | -0.673 | -0.740 |
P value | 0.484 | 0.502 | 0.461 |
Parafovea | |||
Compaq group (n = 48) | 40.92 ± 5.73 | 40.51 ± 4.85 | 40.38 ± 5.22 |
Ranibizumab group (n = 48) | 40.40 ± 5.51 | 40.10 ± 5.28 | 39.56 ± 4.87 |
t value | 0.453 | 0.396 | 0.796 |
P value | 0.651 | 0.693 | 0.428 |
Overall macular area | |||
Compaq group (n = 48) | 39.64 ± 4.85 | 39.40 ± 4.77 | 38.78 ± 4.62 |
Ranibizumab group (n = 48) | 40.43 ± 5.18 | 39.93 ± 5.03 | 39.52 ± 4.85 |
t value | -0.771 | -0.530 | -0.765 |
P value | 0.442 | 0.598 | 0.446 |
Table 6 Comparison of clinical efficiency between the two groups, n (%)
Groups | Markedly efficiency | Efficient | Invalid |
Compaq group (n = 48) | 34 (70.83) | 13 (27.08) | 1 (2.08) |
Ranibizumab group (n = 48) | 25 (52.08) | 19 (39.58) | 4 (8.33) |
Z value | -1.993 | ||
P value | 0.046 |
Table 7 Comparison of incidence of adverse reaction between the two groups, n (%)
Groups | Bulbar conjunctival hemorrhage | Too high intraocular pressure | Adverse reaction |
Compaq group (n = 48) | 2 | 1 | 3 (6.25) |
Ranibizumab group (n = 48) | 4 | 2 | 6 (12.50) |
χ2 value | 1.333 | ||
P value | 0.248 |
- Citation: Li YF, Ren Q, Sun CH, Li L, Lian HD, Sun RX, Su X, Yu H. Efficacy and mechanism of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor drugs for diabetic macular edema patients. World J Diabetes 2022; 13(7): 532-542
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-9358/full/v13/i7/532.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4239/wjd.v13.i7.532