Active clinical trials for "Edema"

Diabetic maculopathy is the leading cause of visual impairment in the working-age population in developed countries. Diabetic macular edema can cause impaired visual acuity and so far is treated by laser, vitreous surgery, and intravitreal cortisone application. Still 50% of the cases do not respond to the treatment. Recently intraocular anti-VEGF-treatment with ranibizumab (Lucentis®, Novartis) in diabetic macular edema has proven efficacy to last over a period of 3 to 6 months. Still, the optimal dosage for those intravitreal injections still has to be found, because frequent injections are necessary. The measurement of visual acuity is inadequate to quantify in detail the visual impairment. Using the newest technology of a high-definition optical coherence tomography (Cirrus-OCT, Carl Zeiss Meditec Inc.) to determine the retinal thickness, and a miroperimetry (MP-1, Nidek Technologies) to determine retinal sensitivity, we hope to find the optimal dosage of intravitreal anti-VEGF treatment in diabetic macular edema. Study objective: To determine the dose response of 0.5mg and 1.0mg ranibizumab (Lucentis®, Novartis Pharma) intravitreal injection in subjects with resistant diabetic macular edema and evaluate safety and tolerability.

Treatment of macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion is more effective with combined therapy of bevacizumab and triamcinolone than bevacizumab alone.

Intravitreal Bevacizumab is an effective treatment for the diffuse diabetic macular edema

Efficacy duration of triamcinolone acetonide (steroid) for treatment of diabetic macular edema. Furthermore, dosage dependency of triamcinolone acetonide comparing a high dosage versus a low dosage.

Macular edema is the most important cause of visual impairment in diabetic patients. Intravitreal injections of antiVEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor) agents and laser treatment are two effective therapies for stabilising visual acuity. However, antiVEGF therapy is very expensive and potentially needs to to be repeated for all patients life. Laser treatment, according to modified ETDRS (early treatment diabetic retinopathy study), produces retinal burns with possible negative consequences such as alterations in the visual fields. With micropulse treatment modality laser energy is delivered in short pulses ("micropulses") rather than as a continuous wave. In this way the amount of energy delivered to the retina and retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) is significantly reduced. This finer control of the photothermal effects should avoid any retinal and RPE damage. At the same time, according to several published reports, the efficacy of treatment appears to be equivalent to conventional laser therapy. Previous studies investigated the effects of 810nm micropulse laser therapy. Recently, this treatment modality has been made available also with 577nm wavelength, which corresponds to the maximum absorption level for blood. Aim of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of 577nm micropulse laser treatment compared to conventional modified ETDRS laser therapy.

Phase 1, non-randomized, open label, noncomparative trial to study the effect of intravitreal injection of aflibercept on eyes with symptomatic macular edema from retinal artery macroaneurysms.

The main objective is to assess the validation of the diagnosis early acute pulmonary edema in elderly patients with acute respiratory distress, admitted in a host of vital emergency services by lung ultrasound associated with the measurement of the inferior vena cava.

The purpose of this study is to determine whether high flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) therapy is non inferior to non invasive ventilation (NIV) in the immediate treatment of patients with acute hypercapnic cardiogenic pulmonary edema associated with respiratory failure in the emergency department.

The primary focus of this study is to understand the anatomic and visual outcomes of patients with refractory and suboptimal treatment response diabetic macular edema (DME) using anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) to Ozurdex, an intravitreal dexamethasone implant. Secondly, investigators aim to understand the differences in cytokine profiles in patients who respond differently to intravitreal anti-VEGF versus Ozurdex. The importance of this study is to identify biomarkers that may help predict patients' response to different treatment protocols. Currently, Ozurdex is not covered by provincial health benefit plans for patients with DME. Our results may help improve access to care for those who have suboptimal results with or refractory to intravitreal anti-VEGF treatment.

This study aimed to compare intravitreous conbercept alone with conbercept plus intravitreous triamcinolone acetonide in DME eyes which showed limited response to anti-VEGF treatment after one injection.