Treatment of type 1 XXXX of @entity3465 with  bevacizumab versus laser.

@entity1 @entity3465 @entity989
PURPOSE: To compare structural outcomes, visual function, refraction, and frequency of follow-up for @entity1 with type 1 @entity989 of @entity3465 in zone I or zone II posterior treated with intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) versus laser. METHODS: The medical records of @entity1 treated with IVB or laser photocoagulation at our institution from January 2009 to May 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Only @entity1 with a minimum of 6 months' follow-up were included. Outcome measures were structural outcome, visual acuity, and spherical equivalent (SE) at corrected age of 1 year. The frequency of follow-up visits during 9 months after treatment was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 23 eyes of 13 @entity1 were treated with IVB and 22 eyes of 12 @entity1 were treated with laser. There was no statistically significant difference in gestational age or birth weight between groups. None developed unfavorable structural outcome. Mean visual acuity was 0.99    0.38 logMAR for the IVB group and 0.71    0.36 logMAR for the laser group (P = 0.34; 95% CI, -0.52 to 0.19). Mean spherical equivalent was -3.57    6.19 D for the IVB group and -6.39    4.41 D for the laser group (P = 0.33; 95% CI, -7.19 to 2.49). In the IVB group, @entity1 had an average of 16.00    6.00 follow-up visits; in the laser group, 6.00    3.00 (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Both treatments resulted in good structural outcome, and no difference in visual acuity or  refraction. However, more frequent follow-up was observed in the IVB group.
