Intraocular Pressure Monitoring Post Intravitreal Steroids: A Systematic Review

Efficacy of single-dose dexamethasone implantation in patients with persistent diabetic macular edema

To investigate the efficacy of single-dose intravitreal dexamethasone implantation in the treatment of persistent diabetic macular edema (DME) unresponsive to 3 consecutive ranibizumab injections over a period of 6 months. Forty-one patients with a previous history of treatment for DME including at least three consecutive intravitreal ranibizumab injections were enrolled in this retrospective study. Main outcome measures were change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and intraocular pressure from baseline to 6th month. At the baseline, the mean CMT was 572.4 ± 123.1 μm which improved to 264.2 ± 114.4, 317.7 ± 141.7, 410.6 ± 169.1, and 382.8 ± 181.5 μm at the 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 6th month, respectively (p < 0.05). The preoperative mean BCVA was 0.85 ± 0.54 logMAR units which improved to 0.76 ± 0.5 (p = 0.08), 0.69 ± 0.4 (p = 0.02), 0.74 ± 0.4 (p = 0.284), and 0.72 ± 0.3 (p = 0.489) logMAR units at the 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 6th months, respectively. Additional injections were required for 13 (31 %) eyes at 3rd month and 14 (34 %) eyes at 5th month due to recurrence of macular edema. Intravitreal dexamethasone implantation caused a significant improvement of BCVA and reduction of CMT in the patients with persistent DME that were unresponsive to 3 consecutive ranibizumab injections. However, retreatment before 6 months in the majority of the patients was needed despite the beneficial effects after the index procedure.

[Tolerability and short-term efficacy of the Ozurdex® dexamethasone intravitreal implant for treatment of uveitic cystoid macular edema: A retrospective study of 52 injections performed at the Clermont-Ferrand teaching hospital]

Macular edema is the main cause of decreased visual acuity in uveitis and determines the visual prognosis. We retrospectively analyzed the tolerability and efficacy of the dexamethasone intravitreal implant in the management of uveitis. Twenty-five patients with uveitic cystoid macular edema were all treated with the Ozurdex(®) dexamethasone intravitreal implant from January 2012 to August 2014. The main outcome measures were visual acuity recovery, changes in macular thickness and resolution of the vitritis. Thirty-two eyes of 25 patients received 52 injections of Ozurdex(®). Both complete regression of the macular edema and resolution of the vitritis occurred in 100 % patients. Visual acuity improved in 62 % of patients: the mean reduction in macular thickness was 252 (±171μm); the mean time between injections was 6.7 (±3.8) months. Secondary ocular hypertension was seen in 33 % of patients. No patient required secondary surgery although a selective laser trabeculoplasty was required for one patient. The dexamethasone intravitreal implant Ozurdex(®) resulted in continuous and complete regression of uveitic cystoid macular edema. It allows evaluation of the potential visual recovery of treated eyes. The tolerability and duration of action provide a rationale for considering Ozurdex(®) as a first-line therapy for uveitis which remains uncontrolled despite optimal systemic treatment.

Repeated intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections can induce iatrogenic ocular hypertension, especially in patients with open-angle glaucoma

OBJECTIVE

To report the rate of intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation after repeated intravitreal injections (IVIs) of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents and to determine the risk factors.

METHODS

A total of 193 patients (217 eyes) undergoing ranibizumab (n = 196) or bevacizumab (n = 21) IVIs were prospectively examined. The incidence of ocular hypertension (OHT) after these injections was investigated with respect to the number of injections, pre-existing open-angle glaucoma, diabetes, YAG capsulotomy, age, and sex.

RESULTS

A total of 1461 IVIs was performed. After a mean of 6.7 ± 7.1 IVIs (range, 1-49), 4.6% (n = 10) had IOP elevation more than 25 mm Hg and required medical treatment (1.4% of them spiked above 30 mm Hg). Patients with pre-existing glaucoma experienced higher prevalence of OHT (12.9%) and greater rates than the control group (19.6 ± 5.7 mm Hg vs 16.4 ± 3.9 mm Hg, p < 0.001). No significant difference was found in the diabetes subgroup (n = 66, p = 0.62) or in the YAG capsulotomy subgroup (n = 24, p = 0.51) compared with the control group. The IOP peak was significantly correlated with the total number of IVIs (p = 0.0002, r = 0.25).

CONCLUSIONS

Serial IVIs may lead to persistent IOP elevation that requires IOP-lowering therapy. The risk is correlated with the number of injections and increases in the glaucoma population, and must be checked during follow-up.

Twelve-Month Results of a Single or Multiple Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant for Macular Edema following Uncomplicated Phacoemulsification

The clinical efficacy of one or two intravitreal injections of a continued deliverance dexamethasone 700 μg implant in ten patients with persistent macular edema following uncomplicated phacoemulsification was evaluated. Complete ophthalmological examination and spectral domain optical coherence tomography were carried out. Follow-up was at day 7 and months 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12. At baseline mean best corrected visual acuity was 62 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study Chart letters, which showed statistically significant improvement at each follow-up, except at month 6, to reach 79 letters at month 12 (P = 0.018). Prior to treatment mean central foveal thickness was 622 μm, which showed statistically significant improvement at each follow-up to reach a mean value of 282 μm (P = 0.012) at month 12. Five patients received a second dexamethasone implant at month 7. Two patients were excluded from the study at months 4 and 8. Intraocular pressure remained stable during the study period with the exception of mild increase in two patients requiring topical therapy. In conclusion there was statistically significant improvement of best corrected visual acuity and mean central foveal thickness with one or two intravitreal dexamethasone implants over 12 months.

Two or more dexamethasone intravitreal implants in treatment-naïve patients with macular edema due to retinal vein occlusion: subgroup analysis of a retrospective chart review study

Background

Dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX implant) is a biodegradable, sustained-release implant that releases dexamethasone for up to 6 months. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of DEX implant in the treatment of macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO) in treatment-naïve patients.

Methods

A multicenter, retrospective, open-label chart review study investigated the efficacy and safety of DEX implant treatment in 289 patients with macular edema secondary to branch or central RVO (BRVO, CRVO) who received ≥2 treatments with DEX implant in the study eye. Concomitant adjunctive RVO treatments were permitted. Data collected from the time of the first implant (baseline) to 3–6 months after the last implant included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal thickness measured with optical coherence tomography. In this subgroup analysis, we evaluated outcomes in patients who had received no previous treatment for RVO complications.

Results

Thirty-nine patients were treatment-naïve at the time of their first DEX implant (18 BRVO, 21 CRVO). Before the initial DEX implant, the mean duration of macular edema in treatment-naïve patients was 4.9 months, mean central retinal thickness was 550 μm, and mean Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study BCVA was 8.5 lines (20/125 Snellen). Treatment-naïve patients received a mean of 2.9 implants, either as monotherapy (n = 12) or with adjunctive RVO treatments (n = 27). The mean interval between implants was 177 days. After the first through sixth implants, mean changes from baseline BCVA ranged from +3.0 − +8.0 lines, and mean decreases from baseline central retinal thickness ranged from 241–459 μm. BCVA improved in both BRVO and CRVO and in both phakic and pseudophakic eyes. Overall, 83.8 % of treatment-naïve patients gained ≥2 lines in BCVA, 70.3 % gained ≥3 lines in BCVA, and 56.4 % achieved central retinal thickness ≤250 μm. The most common adverse event was increased intraocular pressure. Fifteen treatment-naïve patients had intraocular pressure ≥25 mm Hg; none required laser or incisional glaucoma surgery.

Conclusion

Treatment with 2 or more DEX implants had a favorable safety profile and improved visual acuity and anatomic outcomes when used, either alone or with adjunctive RVO therapy, as initial treatment for RVO-associated macular edema.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01411696, registered on August 5, 2011.

The Risk of Intraocular Pressure Elevation in Pediatric Noninfectious Uveitis

PURPOSE

To characterize the risk and risk factors for intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation in pediatric noninfectious uveitis.

DESIGN

Multicenter retrospective cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

Nine hundred sixteen children (1593 eyes) younger than 18 years at presentation with noninfectious uveitis followed up between January 1978 and December 2007 at 5 academic uveitis centers in the United States.

METHODS

Medical records review by trained, certified experts.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Prevalence and incidence of IOP of 21 mmHg or more and 30 mmHg or more and incidence of a rise in IOP by 10 mmHg or more. To avoid underascertainment, outcomes were counted as present when IOP-lowering therapies were in use.

RESULTS

Initially, 251 (15.8%) and 46 eyes (2.9%) had IOP ≥21 mmHg and ≥30 mmHg, respectively. Factors significantly associated with presenting IOP elevation included age of 6 to 12 years (versus other pediatric ages), prior cataract surgery, pars plana vitrectomy, duration of uveitis ≥6 months, contralateral IOP elevation, presenting visual acuity worse than 20/40, and topical corticosteroid use (in a dose-response relationship). The median follow-up was 1.25 years (interquartile range, 0.4-3.66). The estimated incidence of any observed IOP elevation to ≥21 mmHg, to ≥30 mmHg, and increase in IOP by ≥10 mmHg was 33.4%, 14.8%, and 24.4%, respectively, within 2 years. Factors associated with IOP elevation included pars plana vitrectomy, contralateral IOP elevation (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], up to 9.54; P < 0.001), and the use of topical (aHR, up to 8.77 that followed a dose-response relationship; P < 0.001), periocular (aHR, up to 7.96; P < 0.001), and intraocular (aHR, up to 19.7; P < 0.001) corticosteroids.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraocular pressure elevation affects a large minority of children with noninfectious uveitis. Statistically significant risk factors include IOP elevation or use of IOP-lowering treatment in the contralateral eye and local corticosteroid use that demonstrated a dose-and route of administration-dependent relationship. In contrast, use of immunosuppressive drug therapy did not increase such risk. Pediatric eyes with noninfectious uveitis should be followed up closely for IOP elevation, especially when strong risk factors such as the use of local corticosteroids and contralateral IOP elevation are present.

[Ocular hypertension after intravitreal steroid injections: Clinical update as of 2015]

Intravitreal injections are a therapeutic delivery method best suited to the treatment of retinal diseases. Recent years have been marked by the use of anti-VEGF agents as well as the arrival of sustained-release corticosteroid implants in France, replacing triamcinolone acetonide. A common complication of IVT steroids is secondary ocular hypertension (OHT) resulting from increased outflow resistance. This article summarizes current understanding. OHT induced by topical steroids has been described for 60 years. Intravitreal use also shows a temporary effect if the exposure is short, dose dependence, and varying incidence depending on the drug used. Sustained release formulations and discontinuing treatment have reduced the risk of induced OHT. Risk factors that induce OHT must be clearly identified prior to an injection. Most cases of OHT can be controlled medically, although differences exist between different drugs. In cases where it cannot be controlled, removal of the implant, selective laser trabeculoplasty, and filtration surgery can be discussed.

Comparison of intravitreal bevacizumab and triamcinolone acetonide theraphies for diffuse diabetic macular edema

AIM

To compare therapeutic effects of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) versus intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injections for bilateral diffuse diabetic macular edema (DDME).

METHODS

Forty eyes of 20 patients with bilateral DDME participated in this study. For each patient, 4 mg/0.1 mL IVTA was injected to one eye and 2.5 mg/0.1 mL IVB was injected to the other eye. The effects of injection for diabetic macular edema (DME) were evaluated using best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT) by optical coherence tomography (OCT) and intraocular pressure (IOP) by applanation tonometer. Patients underwent eye examinations, including BCVA, CMT, and IOP at pre-injection, 1, 4, 8, 12 and 24wk after injection. During the follow-up, second injections were performed to eyes which have CMT greater than 400 µm at 12wk for salvage therapy.

RESULTS

BCVA (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) at pre-injection, 1, 4, 8, 12 and 24wk after injection was 0.71±0.19, 0.62±0.23, 0.63±0.12, 0.63±0.13, 0.63±0.14 and 0.61±0.24 in the IVTA group and 0.68±0.25, 0.61±0.22, 0.60±0.24, 0.62±0.25, 0.65±0.26 and 0.59±0.25 in the IVB group, respectively. CMT (µm) at pre-injection, 1, 4, 8, 12 and 24wk after injection was 544±125, 383±96, 335±87, 323±87, 333±92, 335±61 in the IVTA group and 514±100, 431±86, 428±107, 442±106, 478±112, 430±88 in the IVB group respectively. Reduction ratios of mean CMT were 29% at 1wk, 38% at 4wk, 40% at 8wk, 38% at 12wk, and 38% at 24wk in the IVTA group. Second IVTA injections were performed to the 6 eyes (30%) at 12wk. Reduction ratios of mean CMT were 16% at 1wk, 17% at 4wk, 14% at 8wk, 7% at 12wk, and 16% at 24wk in the IVB group. Second IVB injections were performed to the 15 eyes (75%) at 12wk.

CONCLUSION

This study showed earlier and more frequent macular edema recurrences in the eyes treated with bevacizumab compared with the ones treated with triamcinolone acetonide. Triamcinolone acetonide was found to provide more efficient and long-standing effect in terms of reducing CMT compared with the bevacizumab.

Animal models of glucocorticoid-induced glaucoma

Glucocorticoid (GC) therapy is widely used to treat a variety of inflammatory diseases and conditions. While unmatched in their anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive activities, GC therapy is often associated with the significant ocular side effect of GC-induced ocular hypertension (OHT) and iatrogenic open-angle glaucoma. Investigators have generated GC-induced OHT and glaucoma in at least 8 different species besides man. These models mimic many features of this condition in man and provide morphologic and molecular insights into the pathogenesis of GC-OHT. In addition, there are many clinical, morphological, and molecular similarities between GC-induced glaucoma and primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG), making animals models of GC-induced OHT and glaucoma attractive models in which to study specific aspects of POAG.

Advances in drug delivery to the posterior segment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Emerging developments and research for drug delivery to the posterior segment offer a promising future for the treatment of vitreoretinal disease. As new technologies enter the market, clinicians should be aware of new indications and ongoing clinical trials.

RECENT FINDINGS

This review summarizes the advantages and shortcomings of the most commonly used drug delivery methods, including vitreous dynamics, physician sustainability and patient preferences. Currently available, intravitreal, corticosteroid-release devices offer surgical and in-office management of retinal vascular disease and posterior uveitis. The suprachoroidal space offers a new anatomic location for the delivery of lower dose medications directly to the target tissue. Implantable drug reservoirs would potentially allow for less frequent intravitreal injections reducing treatment burdens and associated risks. Newer innovations in encapsulated cell technology offer promising results in early clinical trials.

SUMMARY

Although pars plana intravitreal injection remains the mainstay of therapy for many vitreoretinal diseases, targeted delivery and implantable eluting devices are rapidly demonstrating safety and efficacy. These therapeutic modalities offer promising options for the vitreoretinal therapeutic landscape.

Intraocular Pressure after Intravitreal Injection of Dexamethasone Implant for Macular Edema Resulting from Retinal Vein Occlusion

Purpose

A recognized side effect of corticosteroids intravitreal injections (IVT) is the onset of ocular hypertension. The aim of our study was to analyze changes in short-term intraocular pressure (IOP) after IVT of sustained-release dexamethasone implant in order to provide an appropriate monitoring scheme.

Methods

In this retrospective study, the charts of 44 eyes of 42 patients treated by IVT of dexamethasone implant for macular edema resulting from retinal vein occlusion were reviewed. The IOP measurements were performed at baseline and at 15 minutes, 7 days (D7), 1 month (Ml), 2 months (M2), and 4 months (M4) after IVT.

Results

Mean IOP was 13.4 ± 2.5 mm Hg at baseline. Twelve eyes out of 44 (27.3%) were treated with antihypertensive eyedrops for a well-controlled glaucoma at baseline. Following IVT, mean IOP was 11.5 ± 3.6 mm Hg at 15 minutes, 14.7 ± 3.1 mm Hg at D7, 16.4 ± 7.0 mm Hg at M1, 19.3 ± 7.9 mm Hg at M2, and 13.5 ± 3.1 mm Hg at M4. An IOP ≥25 mm Hg or increased by 10 mm Hg or more was not observed in any eye at 15 minutes, D7, or M4 after IVT, but in 8.6% of cases at M1 and in 25% at M2.

Conclusions

It seems reasonable to perform the first IOP monitoring 1 month after IVT of dexamethasone implant and at each efficacy assessment visit (M2, M4). Special attention should be given to patients at risk, such as glaucoma patients. An IOP measurement immediately after IVT and in the following days (1 week) does not seem to be appropriate on a routine basis.

Two or more dexamethasone intravitreal implants as monotherapy or in combination therapy for macular edema in retinal vein occlusion: subgroup analysis of a retrospective chart review study

Background

Dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX implant) is a sustained-release biodegradable implant approved for treatment of macular edema associated with retinal vein occlusion (RVO). The safety and efficacy of treatment of RVO-associated macular edema with sequential DEX implants in clinical practice was evaluated in patients who received DEX implant as monotherapy compared with patients who received DEX implant in combination with other RVO treatments.

Methods

A multicenter, retrospective, open-label chart review study (one study eye/patient) evaluated use of DEX implant and outcomes in 289 patients with branch or central RVO who received at least 2 DEX implant treatments in the study eye. Data were collected from the time of the first implant (baseline) to 3–6 months after the last implant. Subgroup analysis evaluated outcomes in patients receiving only DEX implant during the study versus patients receiving DEX implant plus adjunctive RVO treatments. Endpoints included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal thickness (CRT) change from baseline.

Results

DEX implant was used as monotherapy in 84 (29.1%) patients and in combination with other therapy in 205 (70.9%) patients. Mean number of DEX implant treatments received was 3.1 in the monotherapy group and 3.3 in the combination therapy group (P = 0.344). Mean time between implants was longer in the combination therapy group (177 vs. 151 days, P < 0.001). Mean change from baseline BCVA after the first through sixth DEX implants ranged from +0.6 to +3.4 lines in the monotherapy group and +1.3 to +2.8 lines in the combination therapy group. Mean decrease from baseline CRT ranged from 165 to 230 μm in the monotherapy group and 136 to 175 μm in the combination therapy group. Increased intraocular pressure was more common in the combination therapy group.

Conclusions

Treatment of RVO-associated macular edema with at least 2 sequential DEX implants was safe and effective both when used alone and when combined with other RVO treatments. Improvements in BCVA and CRT were generally similar in the monotherapy and combined therapy groups.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01411696.

Identification of a Novel Mucin Gene HCG22 Associated With Steroid-Induced Ocular Hypertension

PURPOSE

The pathophysiology of ocular hypertension (OH) leading to primary open-angle glaucoma shares many features with a secondary form of OH caused by treatment with glucocorticoids, but also exhibits distinct differences. In this study, a pharmacogenomics approach was taken to discover candidate genes for this disorder.

METHODS

A genome-wide association study was performed, followed by an independent candidate gene study, using a cohort enrolled from patients treated with off-label intravitreal triamcinolone, and handling change in IOP as a quantitative trait.

RESULTS

An intergenic quantitative trait locus (QTL) was identified at chromosome 6p21.33 near the 5' end of HCG22 that attained the accepted statistical threshold for genome-level significance. The HCG22 transcript, encoding a novel mucin protein, was expressed in trabecular meshwork cells, and expression was stimulated by IL-1, and inhibited by triamcinolone acetate and TGF-β. Bioinformatic analysis defined the QTL as an approximately 4 kilobase (kb) linkage disequilibrium block containing 10 common single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Four of these SNPs were identified in the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) GTEx eQTL browser as modifiers of HCG22 expression. Most are predicted to disrupt or improve motifs for transcription factor binding, the most relevant being disruption of the glucocorticoid receptor binding motif. A second QTL was identified within the predicted signal peptide of the HCG22 encoded protein that could affect its secretion. Translation, O-glycosylation, and secretion of the predicted HCG22 protein was verified in cultured trabecular meshwork cells.

CONCLUSIONS

Identification of two independent QTLs that could affect expression of the HCG22 mucin gene product via two different mechanisms (transcription or secretion) is highly suggestive of a role in steroid-induced OH.

Intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide in the treatment of ophthalmic inflammatory diseases with macular edema: a meta-analysis study

PURPOSE

To perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effects of treatment with intravitreal injections of triamcinolone acetonide (TA) with the standard of care for ocular inflammatory diseases.

METHODS

Medline database was searched for causes of macular edema terms in association with intravitreal triamcinolone. The primary outcome of interest included changes in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT). Pooled summary estimates for primary outcomes were calculated as weighted mean differences (WMD) either on a fixed- or random-effect model.

RESULTS

A total of 8 studies were included for quantitative analysis. Treatment with intravitreal TA showed improvement in BCVA compared with standard of care at 1 month (WMD, -0.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.17 to -0.02), at 4 months (WMD, -0.09; 95% CI, -0.15 to -0.03), at 6 months (WMD, -0.13; 95% CI, -0.21 to -0.05), and in CMT at 1 month (WMD, -88.14; 95% CI, -105.86 to -70.43). Increased intraocular pressure (IOP) among patients treated with intravitreal TA was found at 4 months (WMD, 2.83; 95% CI, 1.96 to 3.70), persisting also at 12 months (WMD, 3.78; 95% CI, 2.97 to 4.59), compared with those receiving the standard of care. All outcomes are mostly equivalent at further follow-up times.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravitreal injections of TA may offer certain advantages over the standard of care for ocular inflammatory diseases, especially in the early stage of follow-up. However, it is necessary to take into account risks and benefits of TA treatment for ocular inflammatory diseases due to possible ocular hypertension elicited, in general, by intravitreal injection of corticosteroids.

[Effects of ozurdex on intraocular pressure. A real life clinical practice study]

OBJECTIVE

The dexamethasone biodegradable implant, ozurdex, is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and by the European Medical Agency for the treatment of intermediate and posterior uveitis, and for the treatment of macular edema following retinal vein occlusion and diabetic macular edema. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of intraocular pressure in a cohort of patients from a real-life clinical practice.

METHODS

Retrospective review was performed on the clinical records of patients treated with Ozurdex in Hospital Universitario Cruces in a 6 month period. The following variables were recorded: age, gender, diagnosis and history of glaucoma; intraocular pressure, antihypertensive treatment and macular thickness were recorded before the injection, and in the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 6th months after the injection.

STATISTICAL TESTS

Mann-Whitney U test, Chi square test (with Fisher correction when needed) and Wilcoxon test. The level of statistical significance was set at P<.05.

RESULTS

The effects of 75 injections given to 67 patients (35 women: 52%; mean age: 62) were evaluated. Mean intraocular pressure before the injection was 15.9 mmHg and at 1st, 2nd, 4th and 6th months after de injection it was 18.80 (P=.627), 18.84 (P=.494), 17.02 (P=.796) and 15.5 (P=.829), respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed in intraocular pressure measurements at the mentioned follow-up visits between patients with and without a history of glaucoma.

CONCLUSIONS

In real-life clinical practice, ozurdex shows an excellent safety profile in terms of intraocular hypertension. Patients with a history of glaucoma may also show this profile, with ozurdex being a good option to treat retinal diseases in these patients.

Role of implants in the treatment of diabetic macular edema: focus on the dexamethasone intravitreal implant

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is the leading cause of sight-threatening complication in diabetic patients, and several treatment modalities have been developed and evaluated to treat this pathology. Intravitreal agents, such as anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGF) or corticosteroids, have become more popular in recent years and are widely used for treating DME. Sustained release drugs appear to be mentioned more often nowadays for extending the period of intravitreal activity, and corticosteroids play a key role in inhibiting the inflammatory process in DME. A potent corticosteroid, dexamethasone (Ozurdex(®)), in the form of an intravitreal implant, has been approved for various ocular etiologies among which DME is also one. This review evaluates the role of implants in the treatment of DME, mainly focusing on the dexamethasone intravitreal implant.

[Uveitic macular edema]

Macular edema may complicate anterior, intermediate, and posterior uveitis, which may be due to various infectious, tumoral, or autoimmune etiologies. Breakdown of the internal or external blood-retinal barrier is involved in the pathogenesis of inflammatory macular edema. Optical coherence tomography has become standard in confirming the diagnosis of macular thickening, due to its non-invasive, reproducible and sensitivity characteristics. Fluorescein and indocyanine green angiography allows for, in addition to study of the macula, screening for associated vasculitis, detection of ischemic areas, easy diagnosis of preretinal, prepaillary or choroidal neovascular complications, and it can provide etiological information and may be required to evaluate the therapeutic response. Treatment of inflammatory macular edema requires specific treatment in cases of infectious or tumoral etiologies. If it remains persistent, or occurs in other etiologies, anti-inflammatory treatments are needed. Steroid treatment, available in intravitreal, subconjunctival and sub-Tenon's routes, are widely used. Limitations of local use include induced cataract and glaucoma, and their short-lasting action. Such products may reveal retinal infection. Thus, bilateral chronic sight-threatening posterior uveitis often requires systemic treatment, and steroids represent the classic first-line therapy. In order to reduce the daily steroid dose, immunosuppressant or immunomodulatory drugs may be added. Certain of these compounds are now available intravitreally.

Treating the untreatable patient: current options for the management of treatment-resistant neovascular age-related macular degeneration

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents represent the current standard of care for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). Although effective in a majority of cases, a significant proportion of patients have persisting retinal exudation despite regular anti-VEGF therapy. This exudation is considered to produce poorer visual outcomes in these patients. Some of these patients may have misdiagnosed nAMD variants such as polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy; however, the majority of these eyes have what has been termed treatment-resistant nAMD. Currently, the best way to care for these patients is uncertain. Here, we review the evidence for different approaches to the management of treatment-resistant nAMD, including high-dose anti-VEGF therapy, combination regimes and switching of anti-VEGF agents, and discuss possible therapeutic approaches for patients with treatment-resistant nAMD.

The influence of anti-VEGF therapy on present day management of macular edema due to BRVO and CRVO: a longitudinal analysis on visual function, injection time interval and complications

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of intravitreal bevacizumab injections on the management and outcome of patients affected by retinal vein occlusions, their effectiveness on morphological and functional parameters, the modalities of long-term management and the need for additional laser treatment due to ischemic retinal evolution. Patients diagnosed with branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) or central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) had a comprehensive work-up including complete ophthalmic examination, fluorangiography (FA), optical coherence tomography (OCT), visual field testing (VFT), microperimetry (MP), and laser flare photometry (LFP). In case of BRVO, intraocular bevacizumab injection was performed if significant macular edema/visual deficit was still present 3 months after onset of occlusion and injections were started at presentation in case of CRVO. Post-injection follow-up examination including best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), LFP, OCT, MP, and VFT were performed monthly and recorded at the end of follow-up. Follow-up FA was performed between 12 and 18 months after diagnosis. Injections were repeated in case of recurrence of a significant central macular edema. Patients were subdivided into 2 groups according to number of injections: 1-4 injections or more than 4 injections. The proportion of resolved cases (no recurrence after a minimum follow-up of 12 months) was calculated and correlated with number of injections. In patients needing sustained injections, management modalities were recorded. The proportion of patients having needed laser photocoagulation treatment because of significant ischemic signs was recorded. Fifty-one patients were diagnosed with retinal vein occlusion between 2006 and 2012 at the Centre for Specialized Ophthalmic Care (COS) in Lausanne, Switzerland. Forty-four had enough data and were included in the study. Nine eyes were affected by CRVO and 35 were affected by BRVO. Mean BCVA at presentation was 0.24 ± 0.2 and improved to 0.81 ± 0.38 (p < 0.01) at 48 months. MP improved from 184.9 ± 92 to 362.5 ± 56.2 (p < 0.01) at 42 months follow-up. The number of injections varied from 1 to 25 (mean 5.5 ± 5.43). 31/44 eyes received 1-4 injections (group 1) of which all were recurrence free, with a follow-up of at least 1 years in all. 13/44 eyes received more than 5 injections (group 2) with functional and morphological parameters maintained in 9/13 but only 1/13 patients showed resolution. Rhythm of injection varied from one patient to another but 8/13 patients needing continuous injections had a constant time interval between injections. In 8/44 patients, laser photocoagulation had to be performed due to ischemic complications. The visual outcome using bevacizumab intravitreal injection was exceptionally good and functional parameters such as BCVA, MP, and VFT improved significantly. In about two-thirds of patients, resolution was obtained after 1-4 injections. In one-third of patients, continuous injections were necessary but a constant rhythm for re-injection for each patient could be established allowing to reduce to a minimum follow-up visits. The absence of significant side effects allowed to re-treat apparently without limitation achieving maintained visual function. FA monitoring for the detection of ischemic complications should not be neglected especially in cases where bevacizumab could be discontinued.

Treatment of diabetic macular edema with sustained-release glucocorticoids: intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide, dexamethasone implant, and fluocinolone acetonide implant

INTRODUCTION

Diabetic macular edema (DME) can be treated with intravitreal glucocorticoids, particularly triamcinolone acetonide, dexamethasone (DEX), and fluocinolone acetonide (FA).

AREAS COVERED

The pathophysiology of DME includes multiple growth factors such as VEGF and also inflammatory mediators. Glucocorticoids act on DME through multiple pathways, and current research into their efficacy, safety, and therapeutic potential when administered intravitreally is discussed.

CONCLUSION

The intravitreal route of administration minimizes systemic side effects of glucocorticoids. Furthermore, sustained-release low-dose delivery via the DEX implant or the FA implant will limit frequent intravitreal injection and possibly some cost associated with intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy. In addition, the durable action of these treatments facilitates combination therapy. Patients can receive these implants as foundational therapy, and then receive additional treatment with laser or intravitreal anti-VEGF agents as combination therapy, which may conceivably provide some synergistic benefit. While the FA implant lasts much longer than the DEX implant, potentially decreasing the visit and treatment burden on patients and their families, the FA implant appears to have a greater risk of inducing ocular hypertension and cataract. However, these modalities have not been directly compared in a clinical trial and there is insufficient evidence to draw more elaborate conclusions.