Comparison of the efficacy and safety of anti-VEGF monotherapy versus anti-VEGF therapy combined with subthreshold micropulse laser therapy for diabetic macular edema

Subthreshold micropulse laser combined with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy for diabetic macular edema: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effects of subthreshold micropulse laser (SML) in addition to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy for diabetic macular edema (DME).

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched for studies that compared anti-VEGF with SML and anti-VEGF monotherapy for DME. Outcome measures were best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and the number of anti-VEGF injections.

RESULTS

Eight studies including 493 eyes were selected. Four studies were randomized controlled, and the other four were retrospective. Meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference in BCVA (mean difference [MD] -0.04; 95%CI -0.09 to 0.01 logMAR; P = 0.13;). CMT was thinner in the group of anti-VEGF with SML (MD -11.08; 95%CI -21.04 to -1.12 µm; P = 0.03); however, it was due to a single study that weighed higher, and the sensitivity and subcategory analyses did not support the finding. The number of anti-VEGF injections was significantly decreased in the group of anti-VEGF with SML (MD -2.22; 95%CI -3.02 to -1.42; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Current evidence indicates that adding SML to anti-VEGF therapy could significantly reduce the number of anti-VEGF injections compared to anti-VEGF monotherapy, while achieve similar BCVA and CMT.

Efficacy of anti-VEGF monotherapy versus anti-VEGF therapy with subthreshold micropulse laser (SML) in the management of diabetic macular oedema (DMO): a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Intravitreal injection anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (IVI anti-VEGF) therapy serves as the primary treatment for centre involving diabetic macular oedema (DMO). Conventional laser therapy (CLT) adjunct has proven beneficial; however, it is not widely used due to significant risks of retinal scarring. Subthreshold micropulse laser (SML) therapy has, however, emerged as a comparable alternative to combination therapy, offering a distinct advantage by mitigating the risk of retinal scarring.

METHODS

A search of six databases was conducted. A meta-analysis of mean differences was performed including subgroup analyses where appropriate. Primary outcome was the number of injections at 12-14 months; secondary outcomes were changes in central macular thickness (CMT) and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 6-8 months and 12-14 months.

RESULTS

A total of ten papers including six randomised clinical trials and four retrospective clinical studies were included in our study, capturing 563 eyes of 478 patients. Overall, the risk of bias was moderate for these studies. Significantly fewer anti-VEGF therapy injections were administered in the combination therapy versus anti-VEGF monotherapy patients at 12-14 months who had poor visual acuity (6/18 Snellen or worse) at baseline, mean difference - 2.25 (95% CI; - 3.35, - 1.15; p < 0.05). Combination therapy was not associated with significantly fewer intravitreal injections in patients with a higher visual acuity (6/15 Snellen or better) at baseline. Our analysis also showed significant improvements to both BCVA and CMT were reached at 6 - 8 month post-baseline at the 95% confidence intervals: - 1.13 (- 2.09, - 0.16) and - 4.04 (- 7.59, - 0.50). These improvements remained statistically significant at 12-14 months: - 0.94 (- 1.67, - 0.20) and - 1.92 (- 3.52, - 0.32) respectively with combination therapy.

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate that combination therapy (SML + IVI anti-VEGF) is associated with fewer intravitreal injections. We report a better BCVA and a reduction in CMT at 6 and 12 months from baseline with combination treatment compared to the IVI anti-VEGF monotherapy comparator. SML is a proven non-scarring cost-effective therapy for DMO that should be readily available in the medical retinal therapy as it may reduce the burden of care.

Subthreshold micropulse diode laser treatment in diabetic macular edema: biological impact, therapeutic effects, and safety

PURPOSE

To introduce the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) with subthreshold micropulse diode laser (SMPL), to summarize the biological impact, therapeutic effects, and safety of this treatment, and to discuss the response to DME when SMPL is combined with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) or steroid.

METHODS

The literature search was performed on the PubMed database, with a selection of English-language articles published from 2000 to 2023 with the following combinations of search terms: diabetes macular (o) edema, micropulse laser or subthreshold micropulse laser, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor, and steroid.

RESULTS

SMPL is a popular, invisible retinal laser phototherapy that is inexpensive, safe, and effective in the treatment of DME. It can selectively target the retinal pigment epithelium, reduce the expression of pro-inflammatory factors, promote the absorption of macular edema, and exert a similar and lasting clinical effect to traditional lasers. No significant difference was found in the therapeutic effects of SMPL between different wavelengths. However, HbA1c level and pretreatment central macular thickness (CMT) may affect the therapeutic outcomes of SMPL.

CONCLUSION

SMPL has a slow onset and produces lasting clinical effects similar to conventional photocoagulation. It has been reported that SMPL combined with the intravitreal anti-VEGF injection can significantly reduce the number of injections without influencing the therapeutic effect, which is essential for clinical applications and research. Although 577 nm SMPL is widely used clinically, there are no standardized protocols for SMPL. Additionally, some important problems regarding the treatment of SMPL require further discussion and exploration.

Clinical efficacy of subthreshold micropulse laser combined with anti-VEGF drugs in the treatment of diabetic macular edema: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of subthreshold micropulse laser (SML) combined with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) drugs for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME).

METHODS

The randomized controlled trials on SML combined with anti-VEGF drugs for DME were retrieved from China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wan Fang Data, VIP Data, Sino Med (China Biomedical Literature Database), PubMed, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, and Embase by computer from inception to April 19, 2022. The observation group was treated with SML combined with anti-VEGF drugs, while the control group was treated with anti-VEGF agents alone or SML. And the references of the included literature were manually searched. The Meta-analysis was performed using Revman 5.4 and STATA SE 15.

RESULTS

This study finally included 15 randomized controlled trials involving 891 eyes for Meta-analysis. The results showed that there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups in best-corrected visual acuity at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after treatment. There was no statistical difference between the 2 groups in central macular thickness (CMT) at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment (P > .05). CMT in the observation group was lower than that in the control group at 9 and 12 months (P < .05). There was no statistical difference between the 2 groups in total macular volume at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months in CMT (P > .05). The number of anti-VEGF drugs injections in the observation was lower than that in the control group (P < .05). The occurrence of complications between the 2 groups was not statistically significant difference (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

SML in combination with anti-VEGF drugs in patients with DME are comparable in reducing the number of anti-VEGF drugs injections and CMT, thereby reducing the financial burden on patients. It does not differ in best-corrected visual acuity and total macular volume.

Comparison of micropulse subthreshold laser plus anti-VEGF versus anti-VEGF alone in diabetic macular edema: Systematic review

Intravitreal injection of anti- Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF)is commonly used to treat patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). However, the injection alone requires high cost and compliance. Combining micropulse subthreshold laser (MPSL) and anti-VEGF is a new approach to treating DME. This study intended to answer the question of whether MPSL plus anti-VEGF is effective compared to anti-VEGF alone. The following terms were used in PubMed, clinicaltrial.gov, and Google Scholar: anti-VEGF, DME, MPSL, and diabetic retinopathy. All studies of DME comparing the intervention of MPSL plus anti-VEGF and VEGF alone between the years 2017-2021 were included. Studies with no comparison between the intervention and control group, abstract-only papers, case reports, case series, and systematic review studies were excluded. Five Randomized Controlled Trial (RCTs) and three retrospective studies were analyzed. Four studies found that best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improved in both therapies. Central macular thickness in six studies was also improved. The improvement differences between both therapies were insignificant and the number of anti-VEGF injections was significantly lower in combination therapy. These studies show equal outcomes of both therapies. The reduced number of anti-VEGF injections of the combination therapy could improve the management of DME in terms of cost-effectiveness. Further analysis should be conducted to pool the data from the studies and evaluate the overall outcome.

Adjunct Nondamaging Focal Laser Reduces Intravitreal Injection Burden in Diabetic Macular Edema

This study aims to determine the impact of adjunct nondamaging focal laser therapy on the number of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections and visual acuity (VA) and imaging in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). A retrospective analysis of 18 eyes of 14 patients with DME treated with a single session of the PASCAL 532 nm Synthesis Photocoagulator with Endpoint Management was conducted. Demographic data, VA, imaging, laser parameters, and anti-VEGF injection burden six months before and after treatment were collected. Wilcoxon Signed-rank tests were used to assess changes in VA and injection burden before and after treatment. The mean number of intravitreal injections in the six-month period prior to laser treatment was 3.39 ± 2.57 injections compared to 2.33 ± 2.40 injections following laser treatment (p = 0.02). There was no significant difference between the mean VA on the day of treatment logMAR VA of 0.38 ± 0.27 (approx. Snellen equivalent 20/50) and the visual acuity on the most recent follow-up 6 months after laser logMAR VA of 0.35 ± 0.32 (approx. Snellen equivalent 20/40) (p = 0.34). There was also no significant difference in OCT central macular thickness before (311 μm) compared to 6 months after (301 μm, p = 0.64). Adjunct focal macular laser therapy is associated with a statistically and clinically significant decrease in the number of intravitreal injections required in the six-month period immediately following treatment, without compromising visual acuity or macular thickness. Nondamaging focal laser has the potential to alleviate the burden of injections for both patients and clinics.

Current Treatments for Diabetic Macular Edema

Diabetic retinopathy is a major retinal disorder and a leading cause of blindness. Diabetic macular edema (DME) is an ocular complication in patients with diabetes, and it can impair vision significantly. DME is a disorder of the neurovascular system, and it causes obstructions of the retinal capillaries, damage of the blood vessels, and hyperpermeability due to the expression and action of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). These changes result in hemorrhages and leakages of the serous components of blood that result in failures of the neurovascular units (NVUs). Persistent edema of the retina around the macula causes damage to the neural cells that constitute the NVUs resulting in diabetic neuropathy of the retina and a reduction in vision quality. The macular edema and NVU disorders can be monitored by optical coherence tomography (OCT). Neuronal cell death and axonal degeneration are irreversible, and their development can result in permanent visual loss. Treating the edema before these changes are detected in the OCT images is necessary for neuroprotection and maintenance of good vision. This review describes the effective treatments for the macular edema that are therefore neuroprotective.

Real-World Outcomes of Anti-VEGF Therapy in Diabetic Macular Oedema: Barriers to Treatment Success and Implications for Low/Lower-Middle-Income Countries

Diabetic macular oedema (DMO) is the leading cause of vision loss associated with diabetic eye disease. The exponential increase in the diabetic population and thus, of DMO is an impetus for optimizing the management of DMO. One major challenge in DMO management is the discrepancy between treatment outcomes seen in clinical trials and the real world. Contrary to the homogeneity, better patient motivation and shorter study durations seen in randomised control trials, routine clinical practice is fraught with more diverse populations, undertreatment and variable compliance with long-term therapy. Under both circumstances, this review aims to compare efficacy outcomes and adverse events of DMO therapies within the scope of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) medications, specifically the commonly used ones-bevacizumab, ranibizumab and aflibercept. Impediments and methods to achieve better treatment outcomes in the real world will be addressed to achieve better outcomes. Low- to lower-middle-income countries are faced with even more barriers which range from paucity of data on epidemiology and treatment response to scarce human and financial resources to poorer national level attention and then basic issues like transportation. Additionally, to address the lack of a global consensus in DMO treatment, this review generates and recommends, for clinical and research purposes, an up-to-date consensus algorithm for DMO management universally. Underpinned by results from clinical trials and recent guidelines, this therapeutic flowchart can be utilised in various resource settings including low- and lower-middle-income countries where affordability is a major deterrent to treatment access.

Yellow Subthreshold Micropulse Laser in Retinal Diseases: An In-Depth Analysis and Review of the Literature

Yellow subthreshold micropulse laser (YSML) is a retinal laser capable of inducing a biologic response without causing thermal damage to the targeted tissue. The 577-nm YSML is delivered to the retina abiding by different protocols in which wavelength, power, duration, spot size and number of spots can be properly set to achieve the most effective and safe treatment response in various chorioretinal disorders. The ultrashort trains of power modulate the activation of the retinal pigment epithelium cells and intraretinal cells, such as Müller cells, causing no visible retinal scars. Subthreshold energy delivered by YSML stimulates the production of the heat-shock proteins, highly conserved molecules that protect cells against any sort of stress by blocking apoptotic and inflammatory pathways that cause cell damage. YSML treatment allows resorption of the subretinal fluid in central serous chorioretinopathy and intraretinal fluid in various conditions including diabetic macular edema, postoperative cystoid macular edema and other miscellaneous conditions. YSML also seems to modulate the development and progression of reticular pseudodrusen in dry age-related macular degeneration. The aim of this review is to discuss and summarize the safety and efficacy of YSML treatment in retinal diseases.

Subthreshold Micropulse Laser for Diabetic Macular Edema: A Review

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is one of the main causes of visual impairment in patients of working age. DME occurs in 4% of patients at all stages of diabetic retinopathy. Using a subthreshold micropulse laser is an alternative or adjuvant treatment of DME. Micropulse technology demonstrates a high safety profile by selectively targeting the retinal pigment epithelium. There are no standardized protocols for micropulse treatment, however, a 577 nm laser application over the entire macula using a 200 μm retinal spot, 200 ms pulse duration, 400 mW power, and 5% duty cycle is a cost-effective, noninvasive, and safe therapy in mild and moderate macular edemas with retinal thickness below 400 μm. Micropulse lasers, as an addition to the current gold-standard treatment for DME, i.e., anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF), stabilize the anatomic and functional retinal parameters 3 months after the procedure and reduce the number of required injections per year. This paper discusses the published literature on the safety and application of subthreshold micropulse lasers in DME and compares them with intravitreal anti-VEGF or steroid therapies and conventional grid laser photocoagulation. Only English peer-reviewed articles reporting research within the years 2010-2022 were included.

The efficacy of micropulse laser combined with ranibizumab in diabetic macular edema treatment: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

At present, intraocular injection of anti-VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor) drugs has replaced traditional laser therapy as the first-line treatment for DME (diabetic macular edema). However, ranibizumab, a commonly used anti-VEGF drug, is expensive and requires multiple intraocular injections. It places a heavy economic burden on patients with DME. Micropulse laser is safer than conventional laser and can reduce edema. Combined treatment with anti-VEGF may reduce the number of intraocular injections. This study will compare the efficacy of micropulse laser combined with ranibizumab treatment to ranibizumab monotherapy in the treatment of DME, providing a new regimen for future DME treatment.

Methods

This study is a prospective randomized double-blind controlled clinical trial (RCT) in patients with DME. After 1-year follow-up, visual acuity and macular edema regression will be compared between micropulse laser combined with ranibizumab group and ranibizumab monotherapy group to determine whether the efficacy of micropulse laser combined with ranibizumab treatment was not lower than that of ranibizumab monotherapy in the treatment of DME. Visual acuity measured by the ETDRS chart is the primary outcome measure. The secondary outcome measures are CMT (central macular thickness) measured by OCT (optical coherence tomography) and the number of injections of two groups. Changes in visual acuity and CMT of the two groups will be compared at 12-month follow-up. Before patients are recruited, we provide them with informed consent, in which we explain to them the purpose and process of the study.

Discussion

Micropulse laser combined with anti-VEGF drugs in the treatment of DME can reduce the number of intravitreal anti-VEGF injections, not only relieve the pain of the patients, but also ease the economic and psychological burden of patients, bringing great benefits. However, there is no treatment consensus for the parameters and specific methods of micropulse laser treatment for DME. There is a lack of clinical research data reference of micropulse laser combined with anti-VEGF therapy in clinical practice. This study intends to provide a new direction for clinical DME treatment and also provide a realistic consideration for the application of micropulse laser in DME treatment.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03690947. Registered on 1 October 2018.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06593-2.

Randomized clinical trial comparing intravitreal aflibercept combined with subthreshold laser to intravitreal aflibercept monotherapy for diabetic macular edema

To compare the efficacy and safety of intravitreal aflibercept with three loading doses + pro re nata regimen combined with subthreshold laser application to that of IVA monotherapy on eyes with diabetic macular edema. This was a phase 4 clinical trial with a prospective, randomized, and parallel investigator-driven protocol. Patients with DME were randomly assigned to the IVA monotherapy group (n = 25) or the IVA + SL combination therapy group (n = 26). The main outcome measures were the number of IVA injections and the changes in the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and the central retinal thickness (CRT) at the final evaluation at 96 weeks. The mean number of IVA injections in the monotherapy group was 5.86 ± 2.43 and it was 6.05 ± 2.73 in the IVA + SL group at 96 weeks, and this difference was not significant (P = 0.83). The differences in the mean changes of the CRT (P = 0.17) and the BCVA (P = 0.31) were also not significant between the two groups throughout the follow-up period. We conclude that adjunct of SL to anti-VEGF therapy does not reduce the number of necessary intravitreal injections.

Intravitreal Ranibizumab Alone or in Combination with Calcium Dobesilate for the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema in Nonproliferative Diabetic Retinopathy Patients: 12-Month Outcomes of a Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVE

This study investigates the efficacy of CaD combined with intravitreal ranibizumab for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) in patients with nonproliferative DR.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational, case-control study enrolled consecutive patients newly diagnosed with DME. The patients were treated with 3-monthly loading dose injections of intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) followed by pro re nata injections (3 + PRN), with or without daily oral CaD. The patients were treated and followed up for 12 months. We reviewed their medical records to determine the optical coherence tomography (OCT) findings, number of injections, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and central macular thickness (CMT) at 3, 6, and 12 months after the first injection.

RESULTS

We reviewed 102 eyes of 102 patients; 54 patients received IVR combined with oral CaD (IVR + CaD group) and 48 received only IVR (IVR group). In both groups, BCVA was higher, and CMT was lower, at 3, 6, and 12 months after the injection compared to those at the baseline (p < 0.05 for all), while there were no significant differences in BCVA improvement or CMT reduction between the two groups (p > 0.05). The mean number of IVR injections was significantly lower in the IVR + CaD group than the IVR group (5.4 ± 1.1 vs. 6.7 ± 1.6 injections, p < 0.05) during 1 year of treatment. No adverse events were noted in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to IVR alone, the addition of oral CaD to IVR in DME patients was safe and effective for improving visual function and restoring the retinal anatomy and was associated with the need for fewer injections.

Treatment of Macular Edema in Vascular Retinal Diseases: A 2021 Update

Macular edema (ME) is associated with various conditions; however, the main causes of ME are retinal vein occlusion (RVO) and diabetes. Laser photocoagulation, formerly the gold standard for the treatment of ME, has been replaced by anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) intravitreal injections. Despite its efficiency, this treatment requires frequent injections to preserve the outcomes of anti-VEGF therapy, and as many patients do not sufficiently respond to the treatment, ME is typically a chronic condition that can lead to permanent visual impairment. Generalized recommendations for the treatment of ME are lacking, which highlights the importance of reviewing treatment approaches, including recent anti-VEGFs, intravitreal steroid implants, and subthreshold micropulse lasers. We reviewed relevant studies, emphasizing the articles published between 2019 and 2021 and using the following keywords: macular edema, diabetic macular edema, retinal vein occlusion, laser photocoagulation, anti-VEGF, and intravitreal injections. Our results revealed that a combination of different treatment methods may be beneficial in resistant cases. Additionally, artificial intelligence (AI) is likely to help select the best treatment option for patients in the near future.

Laser Therapy in the Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy and Diabetic Macular Edema

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review highlights indications and evidence on laser therapy in the management of diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema. Particular focus is placed upon the benefits and limitations of conventional laser photocoagulation versus more modern laser photocoagulation techniques, as well as the role of laser photocoagulation in treatment of diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema with the frequent utilization of pharmacologic, including anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), therapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Laser photocoagulation remains the gold-standard therapy for the effective, definitive treatment of PDR, and also is highly effective in the management of DME. However, numerous recent studies have demonstrated the clinical efficacy and improved functional and anatomic outcomes of combination therapy with pharmacologic treatment. Continuing innovations in laser technology and improved understanding of laser-retinal interactions and pathophysiology demonstrate that laser therapy will continue to play a critical role in the treatment of diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema for many years to come.