Safety Profile of Intravitreal Triamcinolone Acetonide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is currently a widespread use of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) for age-related macular degeneration, diabetic macular edema, cystoid macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusions, and uveitis. The aim of this investigation was to assess the rates of various complications associated with this treatment and to determine which factors are associated with the development of these complications. METHODS: A retrospective interventional case series of all patients from one retina specialist undergoing IVTA was conducted in a clinical setting from 2002 to 2005. All disease entities were included. Patients were followed for a mean of 9.5 months after receiving 4 mg (0.1 mL) of nonfiltered triamcinolone acetonide (TA). All complications associated with the injection procedure or with the TA were noted. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-three (223) eyes of 192 patients received a total of 336 IVTA injections between 2002 and 2005. The mean age was 73.3 years and mean follow-up was 9.5 months. A single injection was performed in 144 eyes (64.6%); 2 IVTAs in 55 eyes (24.7%); 3 IVTAs in 16 eyes (7.2%), and 3.6% of eyes had more than 3 injections at a minimal interval of 3 months. The only immediate complication was a single injection (0.3%) associated with a temporary occlusion of the central retinal artery, which opened immediately following anterior paracentesis. Late complications included endophthalmitis in 1 of 336 (0.3%) injections and a steroid response requiring glaucoma medication in 60 of 192 patients (31.3%). In patients with preexisting glaucoma, 58.8% required additional glaucoma medication. Glaucoma-filtering surgery was required in 2 of 192 patients (1.0%). CONCLUSIONS: In the study center, the IVTA is extremely safe in patients without a history of glaucoma. However, patients with preexisting glaucoma with progressive optic neuropathy must be treated with great caution.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".