To describe morphologic and visual outcomes in eyes with angiographic cystoid macular edema (CME) treated with ranibizumab or bevacizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).Prospective cohort study within a randomized clinical trial.A total of 1185 CATT study subjects.Baseline fluorescein angiography (FA) images of all CATT study eyes were evaluated for CME. Grading of other characteristics on optical coherence tomography (OCT) and photographic images at baseline and during 2-year follow-up was completed by readers at the CATT Reading Centers. Three groups were created on the basis of baseline CME and intraretinal fluid (IRF) status: (1) CME, (2) IRF without CME, (3) neither CME nor IRF.Visual acuity (VA) and total central retinal thickness (CRT) on OCT at baseline, year 1, and year 2.Among 1131 participants with images of sufficient quality for determining CME and IRF at baseline, 92 (8.1%) had CME, 766 (67.7%) had IRF without CME, and 273 (24.1%) had neither. At baseline, eyes with CME had worse mean VA (letters) than eyes with IRF without CME and eyes with neither CME nor IRF (52 vs. 60 vs. 66 letters, P < 0.001); higher mean total CRT (µm) on OCT (514 vs. 472 vs. 404, P < 0.001); and greater hemorrhage, retinal angiomatous proliferation (RAP) lesions, and classic choroidal neovascularization (CNV). All groups showed improvement in VA at follow-up; however, the CME group started and ended with the worst VA among the 3 groups. Central retinal thickness, although higher at baseline for the CME group, was similar at 1 and 2 years follow-up for all groups. More eyes with CME (65.3%) developed scarring during 2 years of follow-up compared with eyes with IRF without CME (43.8%) and eyes with neither CME nor IRF (32.5%; P < 0.001).In CATT, eyes with CME had worse baseline and follow-up VA, although all groups showed similar rates of improvement in VA during 2 years of follow-up. Cystoid macular edema seems to be a marker for poorer visual outcomes in nAMD because of underlying baseline retinal dysfunction and subsequent scarring.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.11.030
View details for Web of Science ID 000372718300030
View details for PubMedID 26778329
View details for PubMedCentralID PMC4808340