PURPOSE: The Drusen Laser Study evaluated macular laser to prevent choroidal neovascularization (CNV) and vision loss in high-risk age-related maculopathy (ARM). DESIGN: Prospective, interventional, randomized, contro...PURPOSE: The Drusen Laser Study evaluated macular laser to prevent choroidal neovascularization (CNV) and vision loss in high-risk age-related maculopathy (ARM). DESIGN: Prospective, interventional, randomized, controlled clinical trial in five hospital centers. METHODS: Patients in the unilateral group had neovascular ARM and drusen in the study eye. Study eyes were randomized to laser-treated or no-laser groups. For patients in the bilateral drusen group, eyes were randomized to right eye, laser or no laser; and left eye, alternative. Laser treatment comprised 12 argon spots. Outcome was best-corrected visual acuity and CNV signs, which were monitored for 3 years. RESULTS: In the unilateral group, vision loss occurred in 21 (28.8%) of 73 patients in laser vs 13 (19.7%) of 66 no-laser patients (P=.214). Incidence of CNV was 27 (29.7%) of 91 in laser vs 15 (17.65%) of 85 no-laser patients (P=.061). CNV onset was approximately 6 months earlier in laser-treated compared with no-laser patients (P=.05). In the bilateral group, vision loss occurred in six (8.3%)-of 72 laser-treated vs 10 (13.9%) of 72 fellow eyes (P=.3877). CNV incidence was 12 (11.6%) of 103 in laser-treated vs seven (6.8%) of 103 fellow eyes (P=.225). There was no difference in onset of CNV. CONCLUSIONS: Results do not support prophylactic laser of the fello weye of patients with neovascular ARM. Its role in patients with bilateral drusen remains unclear.展开更多
文摘PURPOSE: The Drusen Laser Study evaluated macular laser to prevent choroidal neovascularization (CNV) and vision loss in high-risk age-related maculopathy (ARM). DESIGN: Prospective, interventional, randomized, controlled clinical trial in five hospital centers. METHODS: Patients in the unilateral group had neovascular ARM and drusen in the study eye. Study eyes were randomized to laser-treated or no-laser groups. For patients in the bilateral drusen group, eyes were randomized to right eye, laser or no laser; and left eye, alternative. Laser treatment comprised 12 argon spots. Outcome was best-corrected visual acuity and CNV signs, which were monitored for 3 years. RESULTS: In the unilateral group, vision loss occurred in 21 (28.8%) of 73 patients in laser vs 13 (19.7%) of 66 no-laser patients (P=.214). Incidence of CNV was 27 (29.7%) of 91 in laser vs 15 (17.65%) of 85 no-laser patients (P=.061). CNV onset was approximately 6 months earlier in laser-treated compared with no-laser patients (P=.05). In the bilateral group, vision loss occurred in six (8.3%)-of 72 laser-treated vs 10 (13.9%) of 72 fellow eyes (P=.3877). CNV incidence was 12 (11.6%) of 103 in laser-treated vs seven (6.8%) of 103 fellow eyes (P=.225). There was no difference in onset of CNV. CONCLUSIONS: Results do not support prophylactic laser of the fello weye of patients with neovascular ARM. Its role in patients with bilateral drusen remains unclear.
