A short-term observational study: initial intravitreal anti-VEGF injection followed by dexamethasone intravitreal implant for diabetic macular edema

作者：Zhihui Dong, Chaoyang Zhang, Lei Dong, Jiayu Zhang, Jiayu Zhang, Xiaosa Li, Ning Yin, Hai Xie, Ping Wang, Bo Lin, Fan Zhang, Zhenguo Chen, Jingfa Zhang, Jingfa Zhang · 发表于：Eye Discovery · 年份：2026 · DOI：10.1016/j.edisc.2026.100037 · 研究领域：Retinal Diseases and Treatments、Ocular Diseases and Behçet’s Syndrome、Ocular Infections and Treatments

Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of a novel “1 + 1 + pro re nata (PRN)” regimen with the conventional “3 + PRN” regimen for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) over a 25-week follow-up period. Methods This retrospective study included 28 eyes from 23 treatment-naïve patients diagnosed with DME. In the “1 + 1 + PRN” group, 10 patients (12 eyes) received one or two intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections, followed by a dexamethasone (DEX) intravitreal implant administered 4 weeks later, and were subsequently managed with anti-VEGF therapy on a PRN basis. In the “3 + PRN” group, 13 patients (16 eyes) received three consecutive monthly intravitreal anti-VEGF injections, followed by PRN treatment. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), and optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) parameters were assessed at baseline and at weeks 1, 5, 13, and 25 after initiation of treatment. Results Both treatment regimens were associated with significant improvements from baseline in BCVA, central macular thickness (CMT), hyperreflective foci (HRF), and cyst area within the deep capillary plexus (DCP). No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups for these outcomes. Although the “1 + 1 + PRN” group demonstrated a numerically greater visual benefit, this difference did not reach statistical significance. Regarding anatomical response, CMT in the “1 + 1 + PRN” group decreased...