Active clinical trials for "Edema"

This study will evaluate the safety and efficacy of a single intravitreal injection of AGN208397 to treat Macular Edema associated with Retinal Vein Occlusion. This study is being conducted in two stages: Stage 1 will enroll approximately 21 subjects who will receive a single open label intravitreal injection of either 75 ug, 300 ug, 600 ug or 900 ug of AGN208397 and be followed for 12 months post treatment; based on Stage 1 results, Stage 2 will enroll approximately 96 subjects who will receive a single masked intravitreal injection of one of three doses of AGN208397 or Ozurdex® and be followed for 12 months post treatment.

According to a recent estimate more than 280,000 people in the United States are affected by uveitis each year. This report, also estimated that uveitis is the reason for 30,000 new cases of blindness/year and up to 10 percent of all cases of blindness. The purpose of this trial is to determine the effectiveness of VEGF blockade with intravitreal pegaptanib in patients with uveitic CME.

: The objective of this study is to determine if bromfenac reduces diabetic macular edema (DME) as an adjunct to argon laser therapy (ALT). Leading cause of Blindness in the working-aged population in the United States. 60% of patients with Type-II DM, and nearly all with Type-I DM progress to Diabetic Retinopathy (DR) in twenty years. Diabetic Macular Edema is the principal cause of vision loss in DR. Approximately 50% of patients with DME will experience a loss of >=2 lines of best-corrected visualacuity (VA) after 2 years of follow-up. The pathogenesis of DME is multifactorial and complex, but intervention stratagem have tended to be singular. Photocoagulation laser applied directly to leaking microaneurysms and a "grid" of laser has been the mainstays of treatment since the publication of the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS). This landmark clinical trial was an NIH sponsored, multicenter, controlled study that demonstrated efficacy of laser for diabetic macular edema. It also demonstrated that 20% of patients did not respond. Recent efforts to improve the results are focusing on pharmaceutical interventions injected into the vitreous cavity. The route of administration and lack of substantiated efficacy are problematic.

Summary of Study Rationale Near-infrared light (NIR) via light-emitting diodes (LED) treatment promotes retinal healing and improve visual function following high intensity laser retinal injury by augmenting cellular energy metabolism, enhances mitochondrial function, increases cytochrome C oxidase activity, stimulates antioxidant protective pathways, and promotes cell survival. LED directly benefits injured neurons in the retina, the lateral geniculate nucleus, and the visual cortex, where perception occurs. From a public health perspective, a Light-Emitting Diode (LED) Array study is important to conduct because it has been approved as a non-significant risk (NSR) device for treatment of eye disorders, it has a low cost of treatment, and it may serve as an effective, non-invasive alternative or adjunctive treatment to laser photocoagulation, the current standard of care for DME. Study Objectives and Hypotheses To determine the effects of short term (3 month) near-infrared light (NIR) therapy on anatomic and functional abnormalities of diabetic macular edema as assessed by visual acuity, optical coherence tomography, multifocal electroretinography (mERG) and fundus bimicroscopy. To assess safety of short term near-infrared light therapy in eyes with diabetic macular edema.

To investigate the plasma drug level, efficacy, and safety of 7-day repeated oral administration of OPC-41061 at 15 mg/day (treatment period 1) and subsequent 7-day repeated administration of OPC-41061 at 15 mg/day or 30 mg/day if diuretic effect is insufficient (treatment period 2) in congestive heart failure (CHF) patients with extracellular volume expansion despite conventional diuretic therapy.

BACKGROUND: Bone marrow edema (BME) in the knee occurs as a localized inflammatory disease in relation to spontaneous or non-traumatic osteonecrosis (ON). Prognosis of BME/ON in the course after knee arthroscopy appears to be poor and in most cases results in knee arthroplasty. Treatment options of ON depend in general on the size of the lesion. Smaller lesions are managed by mechanical unloading and use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, larger lesion in general requires osteotomy or arthroplasty. In animal studies it has been shown that bisphosphonates prevent resorption of necrotic bone during ischemic necrosis and revascularization. In humans, bisphosphonate treatment has been used successfully in bone marrow oedema and avascular necrosis of the femoral head. In an observational study using bisphosphonates (ibandronate, pamidronate) in patients with either spontaneous or (believed to be) arthroscopy-induced BME of the knee a significant rapid and sustained pain relief was observed with a mean decrease on the pain scale on the visual analogue scale of over 60% after 3 months and of 80% after 6 months. Our experience suggests an apparent beneficial effect of amino-bisphosphonates in the treatment of BME of the knee. AIM: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study aims to provide data on clinical, biochemical and radiological outcome of patients with bone marrow edema in relation to spontaneous or arthroscopy-induced ON of the knee treated with ibandronate or placebo. ENDPOINTS: The primary objective is to demonstrate the superiority of treatment with ibandronate compared to placebo regarding clinical outcome (pain [VAS score]) in spontaneous or arthroscopy-induced BME/ON of the knee after 12 weeks. Secondary objectives include a) clinical outcome (pain [VAS score]) after 24 weeks, b) the evaluation of the radiological outcome (MRI scan) at 12 and 48 weeks, c) the changes in biochemical markers of bone turnover, and d) the number of salvage therapies needed in case persistence is observed during placebo therapy. METHODS: The study is designed as a single-center, randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. A total number of 30 patients with BME/ON will be recruited. Each patient will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive ibandronate IV or placebo IV. Additionally, all patients will receive 500 mg calcium and 400 IU vitamin D per day throughout the study, and diclofenac/esomeprazole for initial 3 months (blinded treatment duration 24 weeks). Baseline and follow-up data collection will contain all variables needed for evaluation of clinical, biochemical and radiological evaluation of treatment efficacy. EXPECTED RESULTS: We hypothesize that treating patients with BME/ON of the knee, therapy with ibandronate will be superior in reducing pain, and radiological findings as compared to placebo.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the change in macular edema and the absolute change in visual acuity following intravitreal administered injections of Bevacizumab (Avastin®) or Ranibizumab (Lucentis®) compared with Triamcinolone (Volon A®) in patients with clinical significant diabetic macular edema. The investigators monitor the change in macular edema measured with standard optical coherence tomography (OCT) and the absolute change in visual acuity analyzed by standardized charts according to the protocol used in the Early Retreatment in Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS).

CRFB002D2301: The core study was designed to confirm the efficacy and safety of ranibizumab (0.5 mg) as adjunctive therapy when added to laser photocoagulation and/or mono-therapy in patients with visual impairment due to diabetic macular edema. CRFB002D2301E1: A 24 month open-label extension study for participants who completed the 12 month core study evaluated the long-term safety and efficacy of ranibizumab (0.5 mg) as symptomatic treatment for visual impairment due to diabetic macular edema.

This study is designed to access the safety and efficacy of multiple injections of KH902 in patients with Diabetic Macular Edema (DME).

The population of people suffering from diabetes is rapidly increasing, from an estimated 110 million in 1994 to 221 million in 2010. Diabetic macular edema is the most common reason for reduction in visual acuity in diabetic patients. The standard care for diabetic macular edema is focal and /or grid retinal photocoagulation. During photocoagulation, small laser burns are applied to the retina, the sensory tissue that lines the back of the eye. Studies have shown that photocoagulation of clinically significant diabetic macular edema substantially reduces the risk of visual loss, increase the chance of visual improvement and decrease the frequency of persistent macular edema. However, it remains unknown whether the destruction of sensory layer of the retina during photocoagulation that may cause visual field defects is necessary for successful treatment or is just an unwanted and unnecessary side effect. Based on these concept, a photocoagulation technique was developed to treat the retina selectively (SRT - Selective retinal therapy), with minimal or no damage to the sensory layers. While the treatment is very similar to regular photocoagulation, the SRT laser uses much lower energy and very short pulses. As a result, treatment does not result in visible burns to the retina and previous studies have shown that the sensory layer remains intact. The aim of this study is to determine the effect of SRT on the resolution of the edema.