Comparison of the short-term effect of aflibercept and dexamethasone implant on serous retinal detachment in the treatment of naive diabetic macular edema

Comparison of the therapeutic effects of photodynamic therapy, transpupillary thermotherapy, and their combination on circumscribed choroidal haemangioma

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the clinical and imaging features of circumscribed choroidal hemangioma (CCH), and to evaluate individualized treatment efficiency of photodynamic therapy (PDT), transpupillary thermotherapy (TTT), or their combination, followed by retrobulbar injection of betamethasone on CCH resolvement.

METHODS

Forty-nine patients with CCHs who underwent PDT, TTT or PDT+TTT treatments were retrospectively analyzed. Their treatment efficacy was compared by analyzing the change of best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), subretinal fluid (SRF) and CCH lesion characteristics.

RESULTS

PDT, TTT and PDT+TTT were respectively administrated in 17, 11 and 21 patients. No significant difference in age, gender, affected eyes and tumor location across the three groups. Baseline BCVA were 0.41 ± 0.28, 0.62 ± 0.30 and 0.24 ± 0.24 for PDT, TTT and PDT+TTT groups, respectively (F = 6.572, P = 0.003). CCH treated by three strategies showed significant difference in maximum tumor basal diameter, SRF areas and macula involvement prior to the treatment (P < 0.05). Patients receiving PDT+TTT exhibited larger tumor basal diameter, more SRF, higher ratio of macular involvement than other groups. A total of 38 (77.6 %) cases had good visual acidity with final BCVA ≥0.5 after treatments. PDT and PDT+TTT treatment groups acquired more vision improvement (0.27 ± 0.23 and 0.31 ± 0.26) in BCVA than TTT group (0.09 ± 0.13). All SRF were resolved within two weeks of treatment and no recurrent SRF were found.

CONCLUSION

The three treatments showed good performance in improving visual function and controlling SRF, and individualized treatment should be selected primarily by the tumor location, and then the tumor size and presence of SRF.

Aflibercept vs. dexamethasone implant for recalcitrant diabetic macular edema in pseudophakic eyes - 1-year outcomes from a quazi-randomized study in India

PURPOSE

To assess the safety and efficacy of intravitreal Aflibercept (IVA) versus dexamethasone (DEX) implant for treating recalcitrant diabetic macular edema (DME) in pseudophakic eyes at 1-year follow-up.

DESIGN

Retrospective comparative case series.

PARTICIPANTS

Data of all patients diagnosed with DME between January 2019 and December 2021, who underwent 4-monthly doses of intravitreal ranibizumab but had persistent DME [central macular thickness (CMT) within 10% of baseline value] were extracted from a computerized database. Of these, only pseudophakic eyes that underwent either IVA or DEX implant and had at least 1-year follow-up were included for analysis.

METHODS

DEX implant was preferred before December 2020 and IVA after this time point. In the IVA group, patients were followed up every month while DEX were followed at least every 3 months. Reinjections were considered when vision dropped by at least 1 Snellen's line or CMT increased by at least 10% from the previous visit in both groups.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Comparison of change in vision and CMT at 1-year follow-up in DEX versus IVA groups.

RESULTS

Eighty-four eyes of 84 patients aged 54.4 + 4.4 years were included, 39 (46%) received DEX and 45 (54%) received IVA. Groups were comparable for baseline vision and CMT. Vision improved equally in both groups from 0.83 + 0.15 logMAR to 0.52 + 0.10 logMAR at 3 months ( P < 0.01) and then stabilized till 1 year. However, eyes in the IVA group were 6.5 times more likely (Odds ratio = 6.45, 95% CI = 1.3 - 31.9) to achieve >3-line improvement in vision. The CMT reduction was also comparable between groups (-169 + 51 in DEX vs. -174 + 49 in IVA, P = 0.67). More eyes in the IVA group required >3 injections (91% vs. 69% in DEX, P = 0.01). The IOP was significantly higher at 6 and 9 months in the DEX group and 5 eyes (13%) required IOP lowering medications.

CONCLUSION

In pseudophakic eyes with recalcitrant DME not responding to ranibizumab, switching to IVA or DEX implant results in equal visual improvement and CMT reduction. Though >3-line improvement occurs more frequently with IVA, this comes at the expense of a greater number of injections and follow-up visits.

Efficacy and safety profile of intravitreal dexamethasone implant versus antivascular endothelial growth factor treatment in diabetic macular edema: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To better understand the efficacy of intravitreal dexamethasone implant (Ozurdex) versus antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) treatment in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). A systematic review and meta-analysis. The study included randomized control trials (RCTs) and non-randomized control trials (Non-RCTs) before December 2021 that compare the efficacy of Ozurdex-related therapyand anti-VEGF therapy. We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE. The quality of the included studies was assessed carefully. 30 studies were included. Regarding BCVA change, the overall result revealed no significant differences between Ozurdex and anti-VEGF therapies in patients with nonresistant DME, but Ozurdex group had significantly more VA improvement than anti-VEGF therapies in patients with resistant DME (MD 0.12, 95% CI 0.02-0.21). In terms of central retinal thickness (CRT) decrease, there was a significant difference between Ozurdex therapy and anti-VEGF therapy in patients with nonresistant DME (MD 48.10, 95% CI 19.06-77.13) and resistant DME (MD 65.37, 95% CI 3.62-127.13). Overall, Ozurdex therapy resulted in significantly greater VA improvement and CRT decrease than anti-VEGF therapy in resistant DME patients. Ozurdex therapy was not inferior to anti-VEGF therapy in patients with nonresistant DME.

Comparison of the effects of aflibercept and dexamethasone in central retinal vein occlusion with serous retinal detachment

Clinical relevance: Previous studies have shown the efficacy of aflibercept and dexamethasone in central retinal vein occlusion. However, the efficacy of these two drugs in central retinal vein occlusion accompanied by serous macular detachment has not been investigated and compared. This results in a search for more precise data to evaluate the effects of two drugs in real-world studies.Background: The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of intravitreal aflibercept and dexamethasone implantation injections in central retinal vein occlusion accompanied by serous retinal detachment.Methods: Sixty-eight eyes of 68 patients with treatment-naive macular oedema post-central retinal vein occlusion were enrolled in the retrospectively designed study. All of the patients had serous retinal detachment at baseline. The patients received three intravitreal aflibercept injections with an interval of four weeks and followed by pro re nata treatment protocol (intravitreal aflibercept group, n = 37) or a single dose dexamethasone implantation injection (dexamethasone implantation group, n = 31). Best-corrected visual acuity, central retinal thickness and the height of serous retinal detachment parameters were compared at baseline, and in the first, second, third and sixth months.Results: The groups were similar in terms of baseline characteristics (p > 0.05 for all). The visual gain was greater in the intravitreal aflibercept group (p = 0.013). While the intravitreal aflibercept group had a significant central retinal thickness decrease in the first and sixth months (p = 0.011 and p = 0.001, respectively), this superiority was not observed during the entire follow-up period (p = 0.212). There was no difference in serous retinal detachment resolution between the groups (p = 0.403). Two patients in the intravitreal aflibercept group (5.4%) and five patients in the dexamethasone implantation group (16.1%) had serous retinal detachment at the final visit (p = 0.158).Conclusion: Both intravitreal aflibercept and dexamethasone implantation injections seemed to be effective in the treatment of central retinal vein occlusion with serous retinal detachment. Intravitreal aflibercept treatment yielded better results in terms of visual gain and showed a faster anatomical response.

Incidence of Paradoxical Neurosensory Detachment in Diabetic Eyes Undergoing Hemodialysis for End-Stage Renal Disease

Introduction

Ocular fluid dynamics are known to improve during hemodialysis, and the improvement of uremia after dialysis may lead to osmotic pressure changes in the retina, which eventually affect retinal edema. Recent studies using optical coherence tomography (OCT) to assess the effect of hemodialysis on macular thickness have shown variable results with a majority of them finding a decrease in retinal thickness. Paradoxical neurosensory retinal detachment (NSD) may be defined as the accumulation of subretinal fluid under the macula in patients who are on continuous HD. The purpose of the study was to find out the incidence of paradoxical neurosensory detachment in diabetic eyes undergoing hemodialysis (HD) and its management.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional, prospective study involving end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients secondary to diabetes. This study evaluated the changes in macular thickness in diabetic retinopathy patients with and without diabetic macular edema (DME) by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) 60 minutes before and after HD for ESRD.

Results

Sixty-three eyes (36 patients) were included, with a mean age of 58.2±9.8 years. Seven eyes had paradoxical NSD at presentation with an incidence of 11.11%. Eyes with DME (Group A) showed a significant reduction in central macular thickness (CMT) by 28±2μm post HD, compared to eyes without DME (Group B) where CMT decreased by 15±2μm (p=0.003). Massive subretinal fluid accumulation (paradoxical NSD) with mean CMT 675.57±69.41μm recovered to 250.71±46.79μm at the final follow-up. Five eyes underwent an intravitreal dexamethasone implant (DEX-I, Ozurdex; Allergan, Dublin, Ireland) to achieve the resolution of SRF, whereas two eyes improved spontaneously by nine months.

Conclusion

Hemodialysis results in a decrease of macular thickness in diabetic eyes with or without DME. Paradoxical neurosensory detachment can develop in eyes of patients undergoing HD chronically. Intravitreal dexamethasone implant (DEX-I, Ozurdex; Allergan, Dublin, Ireland) results in early amelioration of such a complication.

The Application of Structural Retinal Biomarkers to Evaluate the Effect of Intravitreal Ranibizumab and Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant on Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema

Background: The aim of this study was to compare the therapeutic effect of intravitreal treatment with ranibizumab and dexamethasone using specific swept-source optical coherence tomography retinal biomarkers in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). Methods: 156 treatment-naïve patients with DME were divided in two groups: 75 patients received 3 monthly intravitreal injections of ranibizumab 0.5 mg (Lucentis^®) (Group 1) and 81 patients received an intravitreal implant of dexamethasone 0.7 mg (Ozurdex^®) (Group 2). Patients were evaluated at baseline (V1), at three months post-treatment in Group 1, and at two months post-treatment in Group 2 (V2). Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and swept source-OCT were recorded at each interval. Changes between V1 and V2 were analyzed using the Wilcoxon test and differences between the two groups of treatment were assessed using the Mann–Whitney test. Multiple regression analysis was performed to evaluate the possible OCT biomarker (CRT, ICR, CT, SND, HRS) as predictive factors for final visual acuity improvement. Results: In both groups, BCVA improved (p-value < 0.0001), and a significant reduction in central retinal thickness, intra-retinal cysts, red dots, hyper-reflective spots (HRS), and serous detachment of neuro-epithelium (SDN) was observed. A superiority of dexamethasone over ranibizumab in reducing the SDN height (p-value = 0.03) and HRS (p-value = 0.01) was documented. Conclusions: Ranibizumab and dexamethasone are effective in the treatment of DME, as demonstrated by functional improvement and morphological biomarker change. DME associated with SDN and HRS represents a specific inflammatory pattern for which dexamethasone appears to be more effective.