Vergleich der superselektiven intraarteriellen Fibrinolyse mit konservativer Therapie : Einsatz bei Patienten mit akutem nichtarteriitischem Zentralarterienverschluss (Leitthema)

The results of conservative treatment for central retinal artery occlusion (CRAO) vary considerably and although local intraarterial fibrinolysis (LIF) is a promising treatment, outcomes have not been compared in randomized trials. The prospective randomized multicenter study by the European Assessment Group for Lysis in the Eye (EAGLE) is the first clinical trial to compare treatment outcomes of conservative standard treatment (CST) and LIF for acute non-arteritic CRAO. Patients (age 18-75 years) with CRAO present for less than 20 h and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) <0.5 logMAR were randomized to either CST or LIF group. Primary endpoint was BCVA after 1 month and secondary endpoint was safety. Mean BCVA (logMAR) improved significantly in both groups and did not differ between the groups. Because of similar efficacy and the higher rate of adverse events in the LIF group the study was halted after the first interim analysis. Due to the similar outcomes of the two therapies and the higher rate of adverse reactions associated with LIF superselective lysis cannot be recommended for the management of acute CRAO.