Aniridia and the ocular surface

Epidemiology of Corneal Neovascularization and Its Impact on Visual Acuity and Sensitivity: A 14-Year Retrospective Study

Purpose: To quantify the severity and location of corneal neovascularization (cNV) and its impact on the visual acuity and corneal sensitivity in a cohort of the patients referred to a specialist cornea clinic and also to describe the etiology of cNV in the cohort.

Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the charts of 13,493 subjects referred to the San Raffaele Cornea Unit between January 2004 and December 2018 to search for cNV diagnosis. The corneal neovascularization severity was measured in the quadrants (range: 1–4) and location was defined as superficial, deep, or both. Best spectacle corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) was measured in logMar. We used the multiple regression analysis to identify the independent predictors of logMAR, after adjusting for age, gender, keratoconus, herpes keratitis, penetrating keratoplasty, trauma, and cataract surgery.

Results: Corneal neovascularization was diagnosed in 10.4% of the patients analyzed. The most prevalent etiology of cNV in our population was non-infectious corneal dystrophies/degenerations followed by herpes simplex virus infection. cNV affected OD, OS, or both eyes in 35.6, 40.2, and 24.2 of cases, respectively. Mean BSCVA (SD) was 0.59 (0.76), 0.74 (0.94), and 1.24 (1.08) in cNV one, two, and three or four of the quadrant groups. Superficial, deep, or mixed cNV occurred in 1,029, 348, and 205 eyes. Severe cNV (three or four of the quadrants) was a significant predictor of low visual acuity (p < 0.001) and reduced corneal sensitivity (p < 0.05). cNV location and its severity were associated (p < 0.05). In addition, corneal anesthesia was associated with lower BSCVA (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Severe and deep cNV are associated with the reduced visual acuity and corneal sensitivity. Our data strongly support the relevance of appropriate follow-up as cNV is a major risk factor for graft rejection.

Corneal neovascularization and the utility of topical VEGF inhibition: ranibizumab (Lucentis) vs bevacizumab (Avastin)

Corneal avascularity is necessary for the preservation of optimal vision. The cornea maintains a dynamic balance between pro- and antiangiogenic factors that allows it to remain avascular under normal homeostatic conditions; however, corneal avascularity can be compromised by pathologic conditions that negate the cornea's "angiogenic privilege." The clinical relevance of corneal neovascularization has long been recognized, but management of this condition has been hindered by a lack of safe and effective therapeutic modalities. Herein, the etiology, epidemiology, pathogenesis, and treatment of corneal neovascularization are reviewed. Additionally, the authors' recent findings regarding the clinical utility of topical ranibizumab (Lucentis®) and bevacizumab (Avastin®) in the treatment of corneal neovascularization are summarized. These findings clearly indicate that ranibizumab and bevacizumab are safe and effective treatments for corneal neovascularization when appropriate precautions are observed. Although direct comparisons are not conclusive, the results suggest that ranibizumab may be modestly superior to bevacizumab in terms of both onset of action and degree of efficacy. In order to justify the increased cost of ranibizumab, it will be necessary to demonstrate meaningful treatment superiority in a prospective, randomized, head-to-head comparison study.