Efficacy and follow-up of anti-VEGF injections in diabetic macular edema in real-life practice at the Dijon university medical centre through the Save Sight Registries

Long-term visual outcomes and fluid compartment changes in limited-early versus early response to anti-VEGF treatment for diabetic macular edema

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed best visual acuity (BVA) and central subfield thickness (CST) outcomes for LER (limited early responder) and ER (early responder) patients at 24 and 36 months.

DESIGN

Retrospective chart review PARTICIPANTS: One-hundred and twelve patients characterized at 3 months after their first anti-VEGF injections as either LER if they met the anatomic criteria (aLER = CST reductions ≤ 10%), visual criteria (vLER = ETDRS letter gains < 5 letter), or both (cLER). All other patients were classified as ER (aER/vER/cER).

METHODS

Variables collected include CST and ETDRS letters at baseline, 3, 24, and 36 months following injections, comorbidities, smoking status, demographics, baseline systemic factors, and the type and quantity of anti-VEGF injections. Analyses were performed using Welch's t-test, multivariable linear and multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

BVA changes from 3 months were significant between cLER versus cER and vLER versus vER groups (p < 0.05). There was a greater decrease in mean BVA from 3 months to 36 months in the cER group compared to the cLER group. Alternatively, mean BVA decreased in the vER cohort, while the vLER cohort slightly increased. CST changes from 3 months were statistically significant (p < 0.01) between all LER and ER groups with LER groups showing greater reductions compared to ER counterparts. BVA and CST changes from baseline to 24 and 36 months were not significant after controlling for baseline differences between LER and ER groups.

CONCLUSION

Results highlight the value of long-term anti-VEGF treatment and the need to further explore options that may lead to continued BVA improvements beyond 3 months.

Recommendations for the management of diabetic macular oedema with intravitreal dexamethasone implant: A national Delphi consensus study

PURPOSE

The intravitreal dexamethasone implant (DEX-I) is an alternative to anti-VEGF for the first-line treatment of diabetic macular oedema (DME). However, several questions remain regarding its routine use and its place in certain situations not always specified in current recommendations. A national consensus approach was, therefore, initiated by French retinal experts.

METHODS

An iterative Delphi consensus approach was used. A steering committee (SC) of seven experts analysed data from the literature to formulate statements divided into five key areas of treatment. These statements were submitted to the independent and anonymous electronic vote of 87 French retina experts among whom 39 expressed their opinion and therefore constituted the voting panel.

RESULTS

After two rounds of voting, 22 and 7 of 38 statements received a strong consensus and a good consensus, respectively. The consensus level was higher for statements regarding first-line indications and safety of DEX-I compared to those regarding efficacy assessment, reprocessing time or pathophysiological biomarkers. The panellists recommended the preferential use of DEX-I for patients with limited availability for multiple injections, those who needed to undergo cataract surgery or who had a recent cardiovascular history, and as a therapeutic alternative to anti-VEGF in patients with a history of vitrectomy, retinal serous detachment, hyper-reflective points or dry exudates in optical coherence tomography (OCT). However, some statements proposed by SC experts were not validated.

CONCLUSION

This study provides some key recommendations to clinicians treating diabetic macular oedema, which may be useful when using intravitreal dexamethasone implants in daily practice.