Comparison of Subthreshold 532 nm Diode Micropulse Laser with Conventional Laser Photocoagulation in the Treatment of Non-Centre Involved Clinically Significant Diabetic Macular Edema
Jazyk angličtina Země Česko Médium print
Typ dokumentu srovnávací studie, časopisecké články, randomizované kontrolované studie
PubMed
32422113
DOI
10.14712/18059694.2020.12
PII: am_2020063010025
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Klíčová slova
- 532 nm, conventional laser photocoagulation, diabetic macular edema, micropulse laser, subthreshold laser,
- MeSH
- diabetická retinopatie patologie patofyziologie chirurgie MeSH
- laserová koagulace metody MeSH
- lasery polovodičové MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- makulární edém patologie patofyziologie chirurgie MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- výsledek terapie MeSH
- zraková ostrost MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- randomizované kontrolované studie MeSH
- srovnávací studie MeSH
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of the 532 nm (green) diode subthreshold micropulse laser (SML) in the treatment of non-centre involved clinically significant macular edema (CSME) in comparison to the conventional laser photocoagulation (CLP). METHODS: A total of 60 eyes of patients diagnosed with non-centre involved CSME were randomly divided into two groups. SML photocoagulation was performed in the first group (G1), while CLP in the second one (G2). Central macular thickness (CMT) and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were measured prior to treatment and at 3 and 6 months after intervention. RESULTS: G1 participants had significantly better CMT at 6 months after laser application (p = 0.04) compared to G2. Additionally, CMT in both groups was significantly lower 6 months after laser application in comparison to baseline values (G1: p < 0.001, G2: p = 0.002). Moreover, significant improvement was detected 6 months after SML in G1 regarding BCVA compared to values before laser treatment (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: SML was more effective than CLP in reducing CMT and improving BCVA in patients with non-centre involved CSME. Therefore, it seems that SML can be a good substitute for CLP in DME treatment if confirmed in future studies.
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org