PPV With Internal Limiting Membrane Peeling for Treatment-Naïve DME
NCT ID: NCT03660345
Last Updated: 2021-12-02
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
PHASE3
11 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2018-09-04
2021-05-04
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
PPV for the treatment of DME was first described in 1992 by Lewis et al, and since then has been studied by numerous investigators under a variety of different clinical settings including the presence of epiretinal membranes, vitreomacular traction (VMT), and diffuse DME. The postulated mechanisms by which PPV may improve DME have included a reduction in macular tangential and anterior-posterior traction, improved oxygenation of the vitreous cavity, and enhanced diffusion of vasogenic growth factors. Other factors that may modulate the response to PPV comprise the patient's lens status and the presence of macular ischemia.
PPV for DME has usually been considered only in patients that responded poorly to other interventions such as laser and/or intravitreal therapy. Typically, such patients have chronic and diffuse DME with, or without, concomitant VMT. Several small prospective, controlled trials have been performed to assess the merits of PPV as a treatment option for such recalcitrant cases with generally disappointing functional outcomes despite having structural improvements. However, since PPV was reserved as a last-ditch effort following a long ordeal with what included multiple lasers and/or intravitreal injections, it should not be surprising that visual outcomes were poor under such circumstances. Presumably most of these patients already would have had irreversible damage to the retina with little or no potential for visual acuity improvement no matter what the intervention might have been. Currently, there are no reports in the literature evaluating PPV as an initial treatment for DME. In this study, we compare PPV to anti-VEGF monotherapy in treatment-naïve subjects with DME in order to evaluate the potential role of PPV in the management of DME before irreversible retinal damage caused by long-standing and persistent DME has set in.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
PPV/MP
Study Group: Treatment-naïve subjects with center-involved diabetic macular edema undergo pars plana vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling
PPV/MP
23 gauge Pars Plana Vitrectomy with Internal Limiting Membrane Peeling
Intravitreal Injection
Control Group: Treatment-naïve subjects with center-involved diabetic macular edema undergo intravitreal ziv-aflibercept monotherapy according to a fixed treatment schedule
Intravitreal injection
Intravitreal ziv-Aflibercept
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
PPV/MP
23 gauge Pars Plana Vitrectomy with Internal Limiting Membrane Peeling
Intravitreal injection
Intravitreal ziv-Aflibercept
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. Patient able and willing to provide informed consent
3. Diagnosis of diabetes mellitus (type 1 or type 2) is established.
4. Patient has non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy and is treatment-naïve for diabetic retinopathy in the study eye. (Patients may NOT have received treatment of any kind for diabetic retinopathy to the study eye).
5. Best corrected visual acuity letter score is 20/32 or worse, and 20/400 or better at the time of randomization in the study eye.
6. On clinical exam, definite retinal thickening due to diabetic macular edema involving the center of the macula is present in the study eye.
7. Central subfield thickness on the spectral domain OCT is greater than 300 microns at the time of randomization in the study eye.
(The investigator must verify accuracy of OCT scan by ensuring it is centered and of adequate quality).
8. The study eye has no history of intraocular surgery within the previous four months. Previous uncomplicated cataract surgery otherwise shall be allowed if the study eye is longer than four months out at the time of randomization.
Exclusion Criteria
2. Patients that received treatment to the posterior segment for any retinal condition must be excluded. Such treatments include intravitreal injections of any kind, retinal lasers of any kind, and subtenons injections.
3. The study eye has a history of previous anterior or pars plana vitrectomy for any reason must be excluded.
4. The patient has a history of systemic anti-VEGF therapy or systemic corticosteroid therapy within the previous 12 months.
5. The patient's macular edema is considered to be due to a cause other than diabetic macular edema.
6. An ocular condition is present such that, in the opinion of the investigator, visual acuity loss would not improve from resolution of macular edema (e.g., foveal atrophy, pigment abnormalities, dense subfoveal hard exudates, a nonretinal condition like corneal scarring or advanced optic nerve cupping from glaucoma, etc.).
7. Substantial cataract that, in the opinion of the investigator, is likely decreasing visual acuity by three or more lines on its own merit (apart from the macular edema).
20 Years
90 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Rush Eye Associates
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Sloan W. Rush, MD
Physician
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Sloan Rush
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
panhandle eye group
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Hospital La Carlota
Montemorelos, Nuevo León, Mexico
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Rush RB, Rush SW. Pars Plana Vitrectomy with Internal Limiting Membrane Peeling for Treatment-Naive Diabetic Macular Edema: A Prospective, Uncontrolled Pilot Study. Clin Ophthalmol. 2021 Jun 21;15:2619-2624. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S320214. eCollection 2021.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
Retina 1
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id