SCORE2 Report 17: Macular thickness fluctuations in anti-VEGF-treated patients with central or hemiretinal vein occlusion

Central Retinal Thickness Variability as a Predictive Factor for Visual Acuity After Dexamethasone Implant in Retinal Vein Occlusion

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Investigate central retinal thickness (CRT) variability and changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) after 12 months in patients with retinal vein occlusion (RVO) treated with dexamethasone intravitreal implants.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Post hoc analyses of two randomized trials in patients with macular edema associated with branch or central RVO treated with a 0.7-mg dexamethasone implant. Central retinal thickness standard deviation (CRT-SD) and central retinal thickness amplitude (CRT-A) were measures of variability. Analyses included multinomial and simple linear regression.

RESULTS

In 400 patients, CRT-SD and CRT-A were significantly associated with central RVO, second dexamethasone implant, and baseline CRT. Baseline BCVA was associated with CRT-A. CRT-SD and CRT-A were significantly correlated with a 12-month change in BCVA (effect sizes of -0.032 and -0.013 letters/µm; P < 0.001). Patients in the highest CRT-SD quartile gained significantly fewer letters (+1.88 letters; 95% CI: -0.46 to 4.23).

CONCLUSION

Greater CRT variability was associated with smaller BCVA improvements in patients with RVO treated with dexamethasone implants. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina 2024;55:XX-XX.].

The Association between Retinal Thickness Fluctuations and Visual Outcomes under Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to examine the association between retinal thickness (RT) fluctuations and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in eyes with neovascular AMD, macular edema secondary to RVO, and DME treated with anti-VEGF therapy.

METHODS

A systematic search of Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was performed from January 2006 to March 2024. Studies comparing visual or anatomic outcomes of patients treated with anti-VEGF therapy, stratified by magnitudes of RT fluctuation, were included. ROBINS-I and Cochrane RoB 2 tools were used to assess risk of bias, and certainty of evidence was evaluated with GRADE criteria. Meta-analysis was performed with a random-effects model. Primary outcomes were final BCVA and change in BCVA relative to baseline.

RESULTS

15,725 articles were screened; 15 studies were identified in the systematic review and 5 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Final ETDRS VA was significantly worse in eyes with the highest level of RT fluctuation (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 7.86 letters; 95% CI, 4.97, 10.74; p < 0.00001; I2 = 81%; 3,136 eyes). RT at last observation was significantly greater in eyes with high RT fluctuations (WMD = -27.35 μm; 95% CI, -0.04, 54.75; p = 0.05; I2 = 88%; 962 eyes).

CONCLUSIONS

Final visual outcome is associated with magnitude of RT fluctuation over the course of therapy. It is unclear whether minimizing RT fluctuations would help optimize visual outcomes in patients treated with anti-VEGF therapy. These findings are limited by a small set of studies, risk of bias, and considerable heterogeneity.

Month 60 Imaging Findings and Relationship to Treatment Outcomes Following Anti-VEGF Therapy for Macular Edema Due to Central or Hemi-Retinal Vein Occlusion

PURPOSE

To evaluate imaging findings from SCORE2 participants through 60 months, to describe the degree of resolution or progression of these variables, and to correlate changes in these imaging findings to treatment outcomes such as visual acuity and the number of treatments administered.

METHODS

SCORE2 participants were followed for up to 60 months. Visual acuity, injection frequency and imaging tests color fundus photography (CFP), optical coherence tomography (OCT), and ultra-widefield fluorescein angiography [UWFA]) were performed throughout this period.

RESULTS

Less than 6% of eyes had subretinal fluid at month 60. Disorganization of the retinal inner layers (DRIL) was the most likely finding to persist, present in 96% of eyes at baseline and unchanged at 95% at month 60. For UWFA, at baseline, there was a mean of 5.0% non-perfusion area (95% CI: 3.3%-6.8%) in the NETWORC grid with little change to month 60. For the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) grid, at baseline, there was a mean of 2.3% non-perfusion area (95% CI: 0.7%-3.9%) with little change to month 60. There was no correlation between any of the imaging variables at baseline and change in visual acuity to month 60 or in the number of injections following the variable treatment timeframe (month 12 to month 60).

CONCLUSIONS

These analyses provide an anatomic explanation for persistent functional deficits many years following initial treatment. Clinical practice patterns should consider evaluation with these imaging tests to help explain persistent functional deficits in many eyes. Additionally, these 8 baseline imaging variables generally should not be relied on to predict visual acuity or intensity of treatment. NOTE: Publication of this article is sponsored by the American Ophthalmological Society.

Foveal Thickness Fluctuations in Anti-VEGF Treatment for Central Retinal Vein Occlusion

Purpose

The aim of this study was to examine the effects of foveal thickness (FT) fluctuation (FTF) on 2-year visual and morphological outcomes of eyes with central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) undergoing anti-VEGF treatment for recurrent macular edema (ME) based on a pro re nata regimen.

Design

Retrospective, observational case series.

Participants

We analyzed 141 treatment-naive patients (141 eyes) with CRVO-ME at a multicenter retinal practice.

Methods

We assessed FT using OCT at each study visit. Patients were divided into groups 0, 1, 2, and 3 according to increasing FTF.

Main Outcome Measures

We evaluated the logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution (logMAR) best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), the length of the foveal ellipsoid zone (EZ) band defect measured using OCT, and the association of FTF with VA and EZ band defect length.

Results

The mean baseline logMAR BCVA and FT were 0.65 ± 0.52 (Snellen equivalent range: 20/20-20/2000) and 661.1 ± 257.4 μm, respectively. The mean number of anti-VEGF injections administered was 5.6 ± 3.6. At the final examination, the mean logMAR BCVA and FT values were significantly improved relative to the baseline values (both P < 0.01). During the observation, BCVA longitudinally improved in Groups 0 and 1, remained unchanged in Group 2, and worsened in Group 3. Likewise, the length of the foveal EZ band defect did not increase in Group 0; however, it gradually increased in Groups 1, 2, and 3. Foveal thickness fluctuation was significantly and positively associated with the logMAR BCVA and length of the foveal EZ band defect at the final examination (P < 0.01). The final logMAR BCVA of patients developing neovascular complications was 1.27 ± 0.72 (Snellen equivalent range: 20/50-counting fingers), which was significantly poorer than that of patients without complications (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the neovascular complication rate among the FTF groups (P = 0.106, Fisher exact test).

Conclusions

In eyes receiving anti-VEGF treatment for CRVO-ME, FTF can longitudinally impair the visual acuity and foveal photoreceptor status during the observation period, thus influencing the final outcomes. However, neovascular complications, which would also lead to a poor visual prognosis, may not be associated with FTF.

Financial Disclosures

The authors have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.