Meta-Analyses of Two Treatment Regimens for Retinal Vein Occlusion

To pool available data on the change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central retinal thickness (CRT), and number of injections as reported by treat and extend (T&E) and pro re nata (PRN) regimens for retinal vein occlusion (RVO).

After PubMed was queried, separate random effect models were fitted to the data extracted and the Wald test was used to compare the estimates of the two independent meta-analyses.

Fourteen T&E and 29 PRN studies were included in two independent meta-analyses. No significant difference was observed in BCVA (+14.74 [+11.52, +17.96] in T&E vs +15.90 [+14.24, + 17.56] in PRN, P = 0.530) or CRT improvements (-259.56 [-189.02, -330.09] in T&E vs -256.58 [-226.57, -286.48] in PRN, P = 0.939). More injections over 12 months were observed in T&E regimens (7.48 [6.32, 8.65] vs 5.13 [4.20, 6.06] in PRN, P = 0.002).

Although more injections may be required, T&E achieves similar functional and anatomic benefits as compared to PRN regimens. [.