Efficacy and complications of intravitreal injection of triamcinolone acetonide for refractory cystoid macular edema associated with intraocular inflammation

The Trend of Drug Therapy on Uveitic Macular Edema: A Bibliometric Analysis of the 100 Most Cited Articles

Background

Macular edema is the most common cause of impaired vision due to uveitis. Although various medications are available, not all uveitis patients with macular edema are satisfied with the treatment results. Therefore, solving this gap becomes the utmost concern worldwide. This study attempted to use bibliometric analysis to compare the valuable information in the top 100 highly cited studies in the field of drug therapy for uveitic macular edema (UME) and then determine the research hot spots and trends in this field.

Methods

In this study, the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) of Web of Science (WOS) was used to collect the top 100 most cited studies on UME and analyze the literature from different countries/regions, institutions, and journals. The visualization knowledge maps is generated by VOSviewer and Citespace software.

Results

The top 100 highly cited studies are from 34 countries/regions. The United States has the largest number of publications, followed by the England, Spain and Germany. The top three institutions publishing highly cited literature are all from the England: University of London, University College London, and Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. Ophthalmology is the most widely published journal with 14 papers. The total number of citations is 1,371, meaning that Ophthalmology is the most authoritative journal in the field of UME drug therapy. The top two articles with the most cited times are from the United States, accounting for 36.5% of the total cited times of the top 10 articles. Keywords were divided into three clusters: the corticosteroid administration pathway, biological agents, and clinical trials. Uveitis, cystoid macular edema, efficacy, dexamethasone, and triamcinolone acetonide appeared more frequently in keywords. Researches on local and long-acting drug has gradually becoming the hot spots and trends.

Conclusion

This study concludes that bibliometric analysis can intuitively and quickly obtain the frontiers and hot spots of research in the field of UME drug therapy. Corticosteroid administration, biological agents, and clinical trials are considered the potential focus of future research.

Intraocular pressure elevation after subtenon triamcinolone acetonide injection; Multicentre retrospective cohort study in Japan

Purpose

To evaluate real-world evidence for intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation after subtenon triamcinolone acetonide injection (STTA) in 1252 Japanese patients (1406 eyes) in the Japan Clinical REtina STudy group (J-CREST).

Methods

This was a multicentre retrospective study of the medical records of 1252 patients (676 men (758 eyes); mean age: 63.8 ± 12.9 years) who received STTA in participating centres between April 2013 and July 2017.

Results

IOP elevation was observed in 206 eyes (14.7%) and IOP increase ≥ 6 mmHg was found in 328 eyes (23.3%). In total, 106 eyes (7.5%) needed medication and two eyes (0.14%) needed surgical procedures. Younger age, higher baseline IOP, and steroid dose were risk factors associated with IOP elevation. Risk factors associated with IOP increase ≥ 6 mmHg were younger age, lower baseline IOP, steroid dose, and higher incidences of diabetic macular oedema (DME) and uveitis. In contrast, with steroid dose fixed at 20 mg, a lower incidence of DME was a risk factor for increased IOP, suggesting that STTA had dose-dependent effects on IOP increase, especially in patients with DME.

Conclusion

Our real-world evidence from a large sample of Japanese patients who received STTA showed that the incidence of IOP elevation after STTA was 14.7%, and was associated with younger age, higher baseline IOP, and steroid dose. Thus, IOP should be monitored, especially in patients with younger age, higher baseline IOP, and higher incidences of DME and uveitis.

Periocular Triamcinolone vs. Intravitreal Triamcinolone vs. Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant for the Treatment of Uveitic Macular Edema: The PeriOcular vs. INTravitreal corticosteroids for uveitic macular edema (POINT) Trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of 3 regional corticosteroid injections for uveitic macular edema (ME): periocular triamcinolone acetonide (PTA), intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (ITA), and the intravitreal dexamethasone implant (IDI).

DESIGN

Multicenter, randomized clinical trial.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with uveitic ME.

METHODS

Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive 1 of the 3 therapies. Patients with bilateral ME were assigned the same treatment for both eyes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the proportion of baseline (PropBL) central subfield thickness (CST) at 8 weeks (CST at 8 weeks/CST at baseline) assessed with OCT by masked readers. Secondary outcomes included ≥20% improvement and resolution of ME, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and intraocular pressure (IOP) events over 24 weeks.

RESULTS

All treatment groups demonstrated improved CST during follow-up. At 8 weeks, each group had clinically meaningful reductions in CST relative to baseline (PropBL: 0.77, 0.61, and 0.54, respectively, which translates to reductions of 23%, 39%, and 46% for PTA, ITA, and IDI, respectively). Intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (PropBL ITA/PropBL PTA, hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 99.87% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-0.96) and IDI (PropBL IDI/PropBL PTA, HR, 0.69; 99.87% CI, 0.56-0.86) had larger reductions in CST than PTA (P < 0.0001). Intravitreal dexamethasone implant was noninferior to ITA at 8 weeks (PropBL IDI/PropBL ITA, HR, 0.88; 99.87% CI, 0.71-1.08). Both ITA and IDI treatments also were superior to PTA treatment in improving and resolving uveitic ME. All treatment groups demonstrated BCVA improvement throughout follow-up. Both ITA and IDI groups had improvements in BCVA that was 5 letters greater than in the PTA group at 8 weeks (P < 0.004). The risk of having IOP ≥24 mmHg was higher in the intravitreal treatment groups compared with the periocular group (HR, 1.83; 95% CI, 0.91-3.65 and HR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.29-4.91 for ITA and IDI, respectively); however, there was no significant difference between the 2 intravitreal treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide and the IDI were superior to PTA for treating uveitic ME with modest increases in the risk of IOP elevation. This risk did not differ significantly between intravitreal treatments.

Interventions for the treatment of uveitic macular edema: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Uveitic macular edema is the major cause of reduced vision in eyes with uveitis.

Objectives

To assess the effectiveness of interventions in the treatment of uveitic macular edema.

Search strategy

Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, and Embase. There were no language or data restrictions in the search for trials. The databases were last searched on December 1, 2011. Reference lists of included trials were searched. Archives of Ophthalmology, Ophthalmology, Retina, the British Journal of Ophthalmology, and the New England Journal of Medicine were searched for clinical trials and reviews.

Selection criteria

Participants of any age and sex with any type of uveitic macular edema were included. Early, chronic, refractory, or secondary uveitic macular edema were included. We included trials that compared any interventions of any dose and duration, including comparison with another treatment, sham treatment, or no treatment.

Data collection and analysis

Best-corrected visual acuity and central macular thickness were the primary outcome measures. Secondary outcome data including adverse effects were collected.

Conclusion

More results from randomized controlled trials with long follow-up periods are needed for interventions for uveitic macular edema to assist in determining the overall long-term benefit of different treatments. The only intervention with sufficiently robust randomized controlled trials for a meta-analysis was acetazolamide, which was shown to be ineffective in improving vision in eyes with uveitic macular edema, and is clinically now rarely used. Interventions showing promise in this disease include dexamethasone implants, immunomodulatory drugs and anti-vascular endothelial growth-factor agents. When macular edema has become refractory after multiple interventions, pars plana vitrectomy could be considered. The disease pathophysiology is uncertain and the course of disease unpredictable. As there are no clear guidelines from the literature, interventions should be tailored to the individual patient.

Intraocular and systemic pharmacokinetics of triamcinolone acetonide after a single 40-mg posterior subtenon application

PURPOSE

To characterize the pharmacokinetics of triamcinolone acetonide (TA) in aqueous, vitreous, and systemic circulation after a single subtenon injection.

DESIGN

Prospective interventional case series.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty-six patients (36 eyes) who received a single posterior subtenon injection of TA (40 mg in 0.4 ml).

METHODS

Aqueous, vitreous, and blood samples were obtained at 1-hour, 1-day, 3-day, 5-day, 10-day, 14-day, 21-day, and 28-day time points after the posterior subtenon TA injection. At each time point, there were 3 to 6 eyes (patients). The concentrations of TA in the aqueous, vitreous, and plasma were analyzed using ultra-performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Triamcinolone acetonide concentration in the samples was measured, and pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated.

RESULTS

The TA concentration-time profile in aqueous consisted of a fast distribution phase during the first 24 hours and a slow elimination phase thereafter. In contrast, the TA concentration-time profile in vitreous consisted of an absorption phase during the first 24 hours followed by a slow elimination phase. The TA in plasma followed a mono-exponential elimination during the study course. The TA concentration peak time for aqueous and plasma was at 1 hour and 24 hours, for vitreous after subtenon injection. The terminal elimination half-life in aqueous, vitreous, and plasma was 11.8, 17.1, and 25 days, respectively. The integral of the area under the concentration time curve (AUC(0-∞)) was 862 ng/day/ml for aqueous, 1262 ng/day/ml for vitreous, and 17.4 ng/day/ml for plasma. The total TA exposure to vitreous was 46% more than total TA exposure to the aqueous. The TA concentration in vitreous was 70- to 98-fold higher than that in plasma.

CONCLUSIONS

Posterior subtenon TA application can provide a sustained high local ocular TA level while also resulting in a very low systemic TA level, which may be well below the normal glucocorticoid level in humans.