Optical coherence tomography-guided ranibizumab injection for cystoid macular edema in well-controlled uveitis: twelve-month outcomes

Preclinical characterization of endotoxin-induced uveitis models using OCT, PET/CT and proteomics

Uveitis is a group of inflammatory ocular pathologies. Endotoxin-Induced Uveitis (EIU) model represent a well-known model induced by administration of Lipopolysaccharide (LPS). The aim is to characterize two models of EIU through two routes of administration with novel noninvasive imaging techniques. 29 rats underwent Intraocular Pressure (IOP) measurements, Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT), proteomic analysis, and Positron Emission Tomography and Computed Tomography (PET/CT). Groups included healthy controls (C), BSS administered controls (Ci), systemically induced EIU with LPS (LPSs), and intravitreally induced EIU with LPS (LPSi) for IOP, OCT, and proteomic studies. For 18F-FDG PET/CT study, animals were divided into FDG-C, FDG-LPSs and FDG-LPSi groups and scanned using a preclinical PET/CT system. LPSi animals exhibited higher IOP post-induction compared to C and LPSs groups. LPSi showed increased cellular infiltrate, fibrotic membranes, and iris inflammation. Proinflammatory proteins were more expressed in EIU models, especially LPSi. PET/CT indicated higher eye uptake in induced models compared to FDG-C. FDG-LPSi showed higher eye uptake than FDG-LPSs but systemic uptake was higher in FDG-LPSs due to generalized inflammation. OCT is valuable for anterior segment assessment in experimental models. 18F-FDG PET/CT shows promise as a noninvasive biomarker for ocular inflammatory diseases. Intravitreal induction leads to higher ocular inflammation. These findings offer insights for future inflammatory disease research and drug studies.

Non-steroidal intravitreal injection for noninfectious uveitic cystoid macular edema: Systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To systematically review the published manuscripts on the non-steroidal intravitreal injection for treatment of noninfectious uveitic cystoid macular edema (CME).

METHODS

The PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, Science Direct, ProQuest, Cochrane Library, ProQuest, Embase, Clinical Key, and Springer were searched for relevant articles published until May 2022. The random-effects models were used to estimate the mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for postoperative central macular thickness (CMT) and visual acuity (VA) changes. VA was transformed into the logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (LogMAR). Meta-regression was conducted for adjusting the effects of potential confounders.

RESULTS

A total of 17 relevant studies (258 eyes) were included in this meta-analysis. A significant improvement was observed in CMT in the last follow up (350.89 ± 108.43) compared to the baseline (452.3 ± 112.67) (Log MD = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.62, 2.02; I2 = 57.7%; P = 0.002). Additionally, VA also significantly improved in the last follow up (0.56 ± 0.29) compared to the baseline (0.75 ± 0.3) (Exponential MD = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.69, 0.95; I2 = 0.0%; P = 0.98). The subgroups analyzed included ten studies on anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGF), three studies on infliximab, two studies on methotrexate (MTX), and two studies on diclofenac. All subgroups showed a significant improvement in both CMT and VA at the last follow-up (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Non-steroidal intravitreal injection including bevacizumab, ranibizumab, infliximab, MTX and diclofenac appears to be an effective treatment option for noninfectious uveitic CME.

Treatment Outcomes of Intravitreal Aflibercept for Uveitic Macular Edema

BACKGROUND/AIMS

To evaluate the efficacy of intravitreal aflibercept for UME (uveitic macular).

METHODS

A retrospective review of records of patients that received aflibercept for UME from January 2017 to August 2022 was conducted. The primary outcomes were mean change in visual acuity (VA) and central subfield thickness (CST) 6 and 12 months from the start of aflibercept treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 16 eyes of 12 patients were included. Indications for treatment included eyes that had previously demonstrated a history of elevated intraocular pressure secondary to a steroid response (n = 10) or a history of non-response or partial response to local corticosteroids (n = 6). Fifteen eyes (94%) demonstrated a reduction in CST after their initial injection. At 6-months, mean VA gain was 2.6 ± 7.7 letters (p = 0.24) from a mean VA of 67.8 ± 10.7 letters at baseline and mean CST improved by 97.6 ± 113.5 μm (p = 0.004) from 458.6 ± 123.1 μm at baseline. Fourteen eyes had 12-months of follow up and received a median of 4 injections over 12 visits. The mean VA at 12-months remained stable compared to baseline (mean change of -1.4 ± 12.5 letters (p = 0.87)) while the CST improved by a mean of 90.9 ± 114.6 μm (p = 0.053) compared to baseline.

CONCLUSION

Intravitreal aflibercept injections resulted in reduced central subfield thickness at all time-points. It appears to be an effective treatment alternative for UME, particularly for patients who are not responsive to local corticosteroids or who have contraindications to corticosteroid treatment.

The role of retinal glial cells and related factors in macular edema

Macular edema (ME) has emerged as a leading cause of visual impairment, representing a critical clinical manifestation and complication associated with many eye diseases. In the occurrence and development of ME, retinal glial cells like Müller cells and microglial cells play vital roles. Moreover, growth factor and cytokines associated with them, such as vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), pigment epithelium-derived factor (PEDF), hypoxia-inducible factor-1α (HIF-1α), angiopoietin-like protein 4 (ANGPTL4), interleukin-6(IL-6), interleukin-8 (IL-8), monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), prostaglandin, etc., also take part in the pathogenesis of ME. Changes in these cytokines can lead to retinal angiogenesis, increased vascular permeability, blood-retinal barrier (BRB) breakdown, and fluid leakage, further causing ME to occur or deteriorate. Research on the role of retinal glial cells and related cytokines in ME will provide new therapeutic directions and effective remedies. This article is a literature review on the role of Müller cells, microglial cells and related factors in ME pathogenesis.

A Case of Persistent Macular Edema and a Disappearing Tattoo

PURPOSE

To describe a case of macular edema (ME), uveitis, and a disappearing tattoo.

METHODS

A single case report from a tertiary referral center.

RESULTS

The patient described in the following case report developed ME 15 years after a recently acquired tattoo on his arm had developed an erythematous rash and subsequently spontaneously disappeared with pathology consistent with a granulomatous process. Chest imaging identified the development of hilar lymphadenopathy that had not been previously noted.

CONCLUSIONS

This case represents a unique presentation of the delayed development of sarcoidosis many years after the patient had lost a tattoo to a dermal granulomatous reaction to the tattoo ink.

Intravitreal Therapy for Uveitic Macular Edema-Ranibizumab versus Methotrexate versus the Dexamethasone Implant: The MERIT Trial Results

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness of 3 different intravitreal treatments for persistent or recurrent uveitic macular edema (ME): dexamethasone implant, methotrexate, and ranibizumab.

DESIGN

Single-masked, randomized controlled clinical trial.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with minimally active or inactive uveitis and persistent or recurrent uveitic ME in one or both eyes.

METHODS

Patients at 33 centers were randomized 1:1:1 to receive 1 of the 3 therapies. Patients with bilateral ME received the same treatment in both eyes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome, measured at 12 weeks, was reduction in central subfield thickness (CST) expressed as a proportion of baseline (CST per CST at baseline) assessed with spectral-domain OCT by readers masked to treatment assignment. Secondary outcomes included improvement and resolution of ME, change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and elevations in intraocular pressure (IOP).

RESULTS

One hundred ninety-four participants (225 eligible eyes) were randomized to dexamethasone (n = 65 participants and 77 eyes), methotrexate (n = 65 participants and 79 eyes), or ranibizumab (n = 64 participants and 69 eyes). All received at least 1 injection of the assigned treatment. At the 12-week primary outcome point, each group showed significant reductions in CST relative to baseline: 35%, 11%, and 22% for dexamethasone, methotrexate, and ranibizumab, respectively. Reduction of ME was significantly greater in the dexamethasone group than for either methotrexate (P < 0.01) or ranibizumab (P = 0.018). Only the dexamethasone group showed a statistically significant improvement in BCVA during follow-up (4.86 letters; P < 0.001). Elevations of IOP by 10 mmHg, to 24 mmHg or more, or both were more common in the dexamethasone group; IOP spikes to 30 mmHg or more were uncommon overall and were not significantly different among groups. Reductions in BCVA of 15 letters or more were more common in the methotrexate group and typically were attributable to persistent ME.

CONCLUSIONS

At 12 weeks, in eyes with minimally active or inactive uveitis, dexamethasone was significantly better at treating persistent or recurrent ME than methotrexate or ranibizumab. Risk of IOP elevation was greater with dexamethasone, but elevations to levels of 30 mmHg or more were infrequent.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Comparing the Efficacy of Intravitreal Dexamethasone and Time-displaced Fluocinolone Acetonide on Central Retinal Thickness in Patients with Uveitis

BACKGROUND

To compare the efficacy of intravitreally administered dexamethasone (Dex) and subsequent time-displaced fluocinolone acetonide (FA) on central subfield thickness (CST) in eyes with noninfectious uveitis.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of twenty-three eyes (18 patients) subsequently receiving intravitreal Dex and FA implants. The main outcome measures were CST, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), and status of inflammation.

RESULTS

CST (Dex: p < .0001; FA: p = .0008) and BCVA (Dex: p = .0009; FA: p = .0005) improved significantly with both implants. Significantly better effects were noted with Dex for absolute and relative CST reduction (p = .0089 and p = .0051, respectively). Final BCVA did not differ between groups (p = .1893). Dex significantly increased IOP, whereas FA did not. One eye was actively inflamed after Dex and FA injection at follow-up (inflamed eyes before injection: [Dex: 2; FA: 6]).

CONCLUSION

Both implants significantly reduced CST and induced a significant gain in visual acuity. Dex might be more effective in reducing CST.

Synergistic Effect of Combined Sub-Tenon Triamcinolone and Intravitreal Anti-VEGF Therapy for Uveitic Macular Edema

Purpose

To investigate effects of intravitreal anti-VEGF in combination therapy with sub-Tenon triamcinolone acetonide (STA) injection for uveitic macular edema (UME).

Design

A single-center, retrospective cohort study.

Methods

The medical records were obtained for 65 eyes of 65 patients with UME. Of which, 32 eyes received combined anti-VEGF with STA injection, and 33 eyes received 40 mg of STA injection alone. The primary outcome was the reduction of central macular thickness (CMT) measured with optical coherence tomography (OCT). Resolution rate of clinical UME and changes of best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) over 24 weeks were secondary outcomes.

Results

There was a significantly greater reduction of CMT with the combination treatment than with STA alone at 1-week (β = −157.9, P < 0.001) and 1-month (β = −53.1, P = 0.019) after injection. The cumulative incidence of macular edema resolution of all eyes was 87.7%, with 90.6% (29/32) in the combined group and 84.8% (28/33) in the STA group, respectively. More incidence of UME resolution was observed in the combined group than the STA group after 1 week (71.9% vs 15.2%, P < 0.001) and 4 weeks (84.4% vs 54.5%, P = 0.009), respectively. BCVA was better for the combination treatment than STA alone at 1-week (β = −0.085, P = 0.070) and 1-month (β = −0.108, P = 0.019) after injection, respectively. Increased intraocular pressure (>25 mmHg) was observed in 4 eyes (12.5%) in the combined group and 5 eyes (15.2%) in the STA group, respectively.

Conclusion

Combined intravitreal anti-VEGF and STA is superior to STA alone for reduction of UME and visual restoration. Addition of anti-VEGF did not increase risk for steroid-induced elevation of intraocular pressure over 6 months.

New pharmacotherapy options for noninfectious posterior uveitis

INTRODUCTION

Noninfectious inflammation of the posterior eye segment represents an important cause of visual impairment. It often affects relatively young people and causes a significant personal and social impact. Although steroids and nonbiologic- Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs (nbDMARDs) are effective both in acute and long- lasting diseases, however they are increasingly being replaced by biologic (DMARDs). bDMARD. This article therefore aims to identify recent advances in the therapy of noninfectious posterior segment uveitis.

METHODS

A Medline-search was conducted using the terms: nbDMARD, bDMARD, posterior uveitis, intermediate uveitis, treatment, corticosteroid. In addition, clinical studies were included as registered at ClinicalTrials.gov.

RESULTS

Currently two major lines of treatments can be identified: (1) the intraocular application of anti-inflammatory agents and (2) the introduction of new agents, e.g., (bDMARDs) and small-molecule-inhibitors. Whereas intravitreal treatments have the advantage to avoid systemic side effects, new systemic agents are progressively earning credit on the basis of their therapeutic effects.

CONCLUSION

Even when current treatment strategies are still hampered by the limited number of randomized controlled trials, promising progress and continuous efforts are seen.

A Review of Local Therapy for the Management of Cystoid Macular Edema in Uveitis

ABSTRACT

Uveitic macular edema is a significant cause of visual impairment in most uveitis types. Treatment options of uveitis have advanced remarkably in recent years. Up to now, corticosteroids remain the mainstay of treatment. Nonsteroidal immunomodulators, and recently the biologic agents, which can reinforce efficacy and enable discontinuation or reduction of steroids to maintenance doses, are becoming increasingly popular in the management of uveitic macular edema. Several medications can be used in intraocular delivery and more and more sustained releasing implants are being developed. This review will briefly focus on the review of local therapy for the management of cystoid macular edema in uveitis, as many of these novel approaches are currently being evaluated in clinical trials.

Medical Therapy of Uveitic Macular Edema: Biologic Agents

Introduction: Uveitic macular edema (UME) is a significant cause of visual impairment in all uveitis types. Methods: Reports that were cited in the MEDLINE database, that analyzed the effectiveness of biologics for UME in at least five patients, with a minimum follow-up of 3 months, published prior to April 1, 2019 were included. Reports that did not compare UME findings before and after the therapy, using either OCT or fluorescein angiography, were excluded. Results: Case series that analyzed the efficacy of intravitreal anti-VEGF agents showed modest, short-term benefit. Studies that investigated systemic anti-TNF agents in patients with noninfectious uveitis reported a therapeutic effect on UME. Anti-IL-6 antibodies have shown promising results for most severe cases of noninfectious UME. Interferon represents an option for patients with persistent UME in infectious and noninfectious uveitis. Conclusion: Multicenter, randomized controlled trials are needed to assess the effectiveness of each group of biologic agents in sufficient number of patients.

Intravitreal therapeutic agents in noninfectious uveitic macular edema

The management of uveitis is challenging for most treating ophthalmologists. The treatment of uveitis often requires the use of high dose of systemic corticosteroid and immunosuppressive agents, which are almost always associated with potential side effects. Intravitreal medications have become a popular mode of drug administration in uveitis patients as they provide high volume of drug to the target tissues, eliminating the risk of systemic toxicity. There has been tremendous development in the intravitreal therapeutics over the last few years. With the advent of sustained-release technique, increasing patient compliance, biodegradable nature of the implant, and introduction of newer agents with better safety profile, the intravitreal medications have become more popular in recent years. This review presents evidence in the scientific literature supporting the use of intravitreal medications for the management of uveitis and its complications.

PROSPECTIVE EVALUATION OF A SUSTAINED-RELEASE DEXAMETHASONE INTRAVITREAL IMPLANT FOR CYSTOID MACULAR EDEMA IN QUIESCENT UVEITIS

PURPOSE

To investigate dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX implant; OZURDEX, Allergan, Inc) in the treatment of uveitic cystoid macular edema that had persisted in the absence of intraocular inflammation.

METHODS

In this prospective interventional case series, 10 patients with uveitic cystoid macular edema and quiescent uveitis were treated with dexamethasone intravitreal implant at baseline and evaluated monthly for one year. Patients were retreated whenever cystoid macular edema recurred. The primary outcome measure was best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at day 90.

RESULTS

At day 90, mean improvement from baseline BCVA was 14.4 letters (P = 0.0003), 70% of patients had a ≥10 letter BCVA improvement, 50% of patients had a ≥15 letter BCVA improvement, and the mean decrease from baseline central subfield retinal thickness was 140 μm (P = 0.008). Improvements were maintained through day 360 with retreatment as needed. At day 360, mean improvement in BCVA was 16.5 letters (P = 0.006) and the mean decrease in central subfield retinal thickness was 158 μm (P = 0.002). One patient experienced intraocular pressure >25 mmHg (managed with topical medication). Two phakic patients (2/8; 25%) had worsening of lens opacity requiring cataract extraction.

CONCLUSION

Dexamethasone intravitreal implant may be an effective treatment for patients with persistent cystoid macular edema in quiescent uveitis.

Management of noninfectious posterior uveitis with intravitreal drug therapy

Uveitis is an important cause of vision loss worldwide due to its sight-threatening complications, especially cystoid macular edema, as well as choroidal neovascularization, macular ischemia, cataract, and glaucoma. Systemic corticosteroids are the mainstay of therapy for noninfectious posterior uveitis; however, various systemic side effects can occur. Intravitreal medication achieves a therapeutic level in the vitreous while minimizing systemic complications and is thus used as an exciting alternative. Corticosteroids, antivascular endothelial growth factors, immunomodulators such as methotrexate and sirolimus, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are currently available for intravitreal therapy. This article reviews the existing literature for efficacy and safety of these various options for intravitreal drug therapy for the management of noninfectious uveitis (mainly intermediate, posterior, and panuveitis).

Ranibizumab Plus Combined Surgery for Treatment of Neovascular Glaucoma with Vitreous Hemorrhage

Background:

Neovascular glaucoma (NVG) is a refractory glaucoma. The management of NVG is very difficult, and it is more difficult when combined with vitreous hemorrhage. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of ranibizumab plus combined surgery for NVG with vitreous hemorrhage.

Methods:

A total of 26 eyes of 26 NVG patients with vitreous hemorrhage were recruited in this study. The patients aged from 36 to 63 years with a mean age of 51.97 ± 7.60 years. The mean intraocular pressure (IOP) was 46.38 ± 5.75 mmHg (1 mmHg = 0.133 kPa) while being treated with the maximum medical therapy. The mean best-corrected visual acuities converted to logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR BCVA) was 2.62 ± 0.43. All the patients underwent intravitreal injection of 0.5 mg (0.05 ml) ranibizumab combined with pars plana vitrectomy (PPV), pars plana lensectomy (PPL) with a preserved anterior capsule, panretinal photocoagulation (PRP), and trabeculectomy (intravitreal ranibizumab [IVR] + PPV + PPL + PRP + trabeculectomy). The IOP and logMAR BCVA were the main outcome measures in this study.

Results:

The follow-up period was 12 months. The mean postoperative IOPs were 26.38 ± 3.75 mmHg, 21.36 ± 3.32 mmHg, 18.57 ± 3.21 mmHg, and 16.68 ± 2.96 mmHg, respectively at 7 days, 1 month, 3 months, and 12 months after PPV + PPL + PRP + trabeculectomy. At the last follow-up, the mean IOP was significantly lower than the preoperative one (t = 6.612, P = 0.001). At 7 days, 1 month, 3 months, and 12 months after PPV + PPL + PRP + trabeculectomy, the mean logMAR BCVA were 1.30 ± 0.36, 1.29 ± 0.37, 1.29 ± 0.39, and 1.26 ± 0.29, respectively. At the last follow-up, the mean logMAR BCVA was significantly improved, and the difference was statistically significant compared with preoperative one (t = 6.133, P = 0.002). The logMAR BCVA improved in 22 eyes (84.62%), and remained stable in 4 eyes (15.38%). The neovascularization in the iris and the angle regressed significantly in all patients 7 days after ranibizumab injection. No serious complications occurred during 12 months of the study.

Conclusions:

IVR + PPV + PPL + PRP + trabeculectomy can control IOP well and improve BCVA without severe complication for NVG patients with vitreous hemorrhage.