Refractive outcome of intravitreal bevacizumab injection in comparison to spontaneous regression of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP)

ABSTRACT

Purpose

To assess refractive errors in preterm infants following intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injection for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) and to compare it with premature babies with spontaneous regressed ROP.

Materials and Methods

Eighty seven premature infants were included in this study, comprising group1: 38 infants who underwent IVB monotherapy, and group2: 49 infants with spontaneously regressed ROP. Cycloplegic refraction was performed for all infants at 1-year adjusted age and the refractive outcome was compared between the groups.

Results

At 1- year adjusted age, the mean SEQ value was not significantly different between group 1 and 2 (p = .646). Four eyes (10.5%) in group1 and 4 eyes (8.2%) in group 2 were myopic. Also, refractive anisometropia was found in 9 infants (23.7%) from group1 and 5 infants (10.2%) in groups 2, which was not significantly different between groups (χ² (1, n = 87) = 2.87, p = .081). At the time of follow up, none of our cases were strabismic. After making an adjustment for gestational age and birth weight in a logistic regression model, mean SEQ was not significantly different between two groups (p = .61)

Conclusion

At adjusted 1 year of age, refractive outcomes were not significantly different between premature infants who underwent IVB injection and the infants with spontaneous regression of ROP. Further studies with longer duration are warranted to elucidate the effects of IVB on the emmetropization process. Biometry assessments would be helpful in this regard.

KEYWORDS:

• Premature infant
• retinopathy of prematurity (ROP)
• intravitreal bevacizumab injection (IVB)
• refractive error

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by a research grant from the research deputy of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran (No. 950646). Also, we would like to thank miss Marzieh Najjaran for her help in the process of this study.

Disclosure of interest

The authors report no conflict of interest.