Key result
Adjunctive aqueous suppressants provided limited short-term anatomical benefit in reducing retinal thickness, particularly in DME and refractory nAMD, but lacked consistent functional effects.
Why the study?
Many eyes treated with anti-VEGF for DME, RVO, and nAMD show persistent fluid, and the clinical value of adjunctive aqueous suppressants remains uncertain.
Do adjunctive aqueous suppressants improve retinal thickness and visual outcomes in patients receiving anti-VEGF therapy for DME, RVO, and nAMD?
Systematic Review (n=495)
Do adjunctive aqueous suppressants improve retinal thickness and visual outcomes in patients receiving anti-VEGF therapy for DME, RVO, and nAMD?
Adjunctive aqueous suppressants may offer limited short-term anatomical benefits in reducing retinal thickness for patients on anti-VEGF therapy, but lack consistent functional improvements.
Limited short-term anatomical benefit does not support routine adjunctive aqueous suppressants with anti-VEGF; leaves open need for targeted RCTs.
Our goal is to determine whether adjunctive aqueous suppressants (topical β-blockers, carbonic anhydrase inhibitors, or oral acetazolamide) enhance outcomes of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy for diabetic macular edema (DME), retinal vein occlusion (RVO), and neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), focusing on retinal thickness, visual acuity, injection burden, intraocular pressure (IOP), and safety. DME, RVO, and nAMD are leading causes of vision loss treated with repeated intravitreal injections, yet many eyes show persistent fluid. Aqueous suppressants are inexpensive and widely available, with potential to prolong intravitreal drug residence and improve outcomes, but their clinical value remains uncertain. Following a registered protocol, we searched 4 databases (January, 2000 toMay, 2025) for randomized and comparative studies evaluating adjunct aqueous suppressants with anti-VEGF therapy. Primary outcome was change in retinal thickness; secondary outcomes included visual acuity, injection burden, IOP, and adverse events. Risk of bias was assessed and findings synthesized narratively. Twelve studies (7 randomized trials; 495 eyes) met inclusion criteria. In DME, 3 of 4 trials showed greater thickness reduction with adjunctive dorzolamide (±timolol), although visual gains were inconsistent. In RVO, 1 trial suggested transient anatomical benefit, whereas oral acetazolamide showed no added effect. In nAMD, adjunctive dorzolamide-timolol reduced residual fluid in refractory cases without visual or treatment-sparing benefit. Topical therapy produced modest IOP reductions without serious adverse events. Adjunct aqueous suppressants may provide limited short-term anatomical benefit, particularly in DME and refractory nAMD, but consistent functional or durability effects are not found in this study. Larger, longer-term randomized studies are needed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sadek et al. (2026) conducted a systematic review in Diabetic macular edema, retinal vein occlusion, and neovascular age-related macular degeneration (n=495). Adjunctive aqueous suppressants vs. Anti-VEGF therapy alone was evaluated on Change in retinal thickness. Adjunctive aqueous suppressants provided limited short-term anatomical benefit in reducing retinal thickness, particularly in DME and refractory nAMD, but lacked consistent functional effects.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: