CORRELATION OF VISUAL ACUITY AND MACULAR THICKNESS MEASURED BY OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY IN PATIENTS WITH PERSISTENT MACULAR EDEMA

Two-photon excitation fluorescence in ophthalmology: safety and improved imaging for functional diagnostics

Two-photon excitation fluorescence (TPEF) is emerging as a powerful imaging technique with superior penetration power in scattering media, allowing for functional imaging of biological tissues at a subcellular level. TPEF is commonly used in cancer diagnostics, as it enables the direct observation of metabolism within living cells. The technique is now widely used in various medical fields, including ophthalmology. The eye is a complex and delicate organ with multiple layers of different cell types and tissues. Although this structure is ideal for visual perception, it generates aberrations in TPEF eye imaging. However, adaptive optics can now compensate for these aberrations, allowing for improved imaging of the eyes of animal models for human diseases. The eye is naturally built to filter out harmful wavelengths, but these wavelengths can be mimicked and thereby utilized in diagnostics via two-photon (2Ph) excitation. Recent advances in laser-source manufacturing have made it possible to minimize the exposure of in vivo measurements within safety, while achieving sufficient signals to detect for functional images, making TPEF a viable option for human application. This review explores recent advances in wavefront-distortion correction in animal models and the safety of use of TPEF on human subjects, both of which make TPEF a potentially powerful tool for ophthalmological diagnostics.

From mouse to human: Accessing the biochemistry of vision in vivo by two-photon excitation

The eye is an ideal organ for imaging by a multi-photon excitation approach, because ocular tissues such as the sclera, cornea, lens and neurosensory retina, are highly transparent to infrared (IR) light. The interface between the retina and the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) is especially informative, because it reflects the health of the visual (retinoid) cycle and its changes in response to external stress, genetic manipulations, and drug treatments. Vitamin A-derived retinoids, like retinyl esters, are natural fluorophores that respond to multi-photon excitation with near IR light, bypassing the filter-like properties of the cornea, lens, and macular pigments. Also, during natural aging some retinoids form bisretinoids, like diretinoid-pyridiniumethanolamine (A2E), that are highly fluorescent. These bisretinoids appear to be elevated concurrently with aging. Vitamin A-derived retinoids and bisretinoidss are detected by two-photon ophthalmoscopy (2PO), using a new class of light sources with adjustable spatial, temporal, and spectral properties. Furthermore, the two-photon (2P) absorption of IR light by the visual pigments in rod and cone photoreceptors can initiate visual transduction by cis-trans isomerization of retinal, enabling parallel functional studies. Recently we overcame concerns about safety, data interpretation and complexity of the 2P-based instrumentation, the major roadblocks toward advancing this modality to the clinic. These imaging and retina-function assessment advancements have enabled us to conduct the first 2P studies with humans.

Management of Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema Switched from Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant to Fluocinolone Acetonide Intravitreal Implant

To assess anatomical and functional outcomes after switching from dexamethasone implant (DEXi) to fluocinolone acetonide implant (FAci) in 113 diabetic macular edema eyes, a multicentric retrospective observational study was conducted. Seventy-five eyes (73.5%) were switched 1−8 weeks after their last DEXi. The mean best-corrected visual acuity improved to 59.8 letters at month 4 and remained stable during the follow-up. The mean central macular thickness (CMT) significantly decreased during the follow-up, with a minimum of 320.9 μm at month 3. The baseline CMT was higher in eyes that received the last DEXi >8 weeks versus <8 weeks before the first FAci (p < 0.021). After FAci injection, additional treatments were needed in 37 (32.7%) eyes. A longer diabetes duration (p = 0.009), a longer time between the last DEXi and the first FAci (p = 0.035), and a high baseline CMT (p = 0.003) were risk factors for additional treatments. The mean intraocular pressure was <19 mmHg at all timepoints, with no difference between eyes receiving the last DEXi ≤8 weeks or >8 weeks before the switch. Switching from DEXi to FAci in DME is effective and safe. A short time between the last DEXi and the first FAci reduced CMT fluctuations and the need for early additional treatments.

Long-term results of a single injection of intravitreal dexamethasone as initial therapy in diabetic macular edema

Purpose:

To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of the intravitreal dexamethasone implant in the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) as initial therapy.

Methods:

A hospital-based prospective, non-comparative case study of recently detected DME patients was conducted between July 2016 and December 2017, in which30 eyes of 30 patients were studied. Presenting vision, age, gender, duration of diabetes, general and ocular examination, intraocular pressure, indirect ophthalmoscopy, fundus fluorescein angiography, optical coherence tomography (OCT), and blood sugar levels were noted. Patients with increased central macular thickness (CMT) received an intravitreal dexamethasone implant as initial therapy. All were followed up at 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year, and the findings were recorded and analyzed using SPSS software.

Results:

30 eyes of 30 patients were studied which included 22 males and 8 females. The mean age of presentation was 58.7 ± 4.45 years. The mean decrease in CMT following intravitreal dexamethasone was 269.27 ± 112.002, 253.5 ± 108.294, and 286.73 ± 143.395 μm at the end of 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively, and the mean improvement in visual acuity (VA) was 2.27 ± 1.70 lines at 3 months, 2.27 ± 1.83 lines at 6 months, and 1.17 ± 2.00 lines at 12 months. Out of 30 cases, 4 had persistent DME and 6 had recurrence of DME at completion of 1 year of follow-up.

Conclusion:

Intravitreal dexamethasone as initial therapy in the treatment of DME is both safe and efficacious in the reduction of CMT and improvement of vision and can be considered as primary therapy for DME.

Intravitreal steroids for macular edema in diabetes

BACKGROUND

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is secondary to leakage from diseased retinal capillaries with thickening of central retina, and is an important cause of poor central visual acuity in people with diabetic retinopathy. Intravitreal steroids have been used to reduce retinal thickness and improve vision in people with DME.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of intravitreal steroid therapy compared with other treatments for DME.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase on 15 May, 2019. We also searched reference lists, Science Citation Index, conference proceedings, and relevant trial registers. We conducted a top up search on 21 October, 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials that evaluated any type of intravitreal steroids as monotherapy against any other intervention (e.g. observation, laser photocoagulation, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (antiVEGF) for DME.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 trials (4348 participants, 4505 eyes). These trials compared intravitreal steroid therapies versus other treatments, including intravitreal antiVEGF therapy, laser photocoagulation, and sham injection. Most trials had an overall unclear or high risk of bias. One trial (701 eyes ) compared intravitreal dexamethasone implant 0.7mg with sham. We found moderate-certainty evidence that dexamethasone leads to slightly more improvement of visual acuity than sham at 12 months (mean difference [MD] -0.08 logMAR, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.12 to -0.05 logMAR). Regarding improvement of three or more lines of visual acuity, there was moderate-certainty evidence in favor of dexamethasone at 12 months, but the CI covered the null value (risk ratio (RR) 1.39, 95% CI 0.91 to 2.12). Regarding adverse events, dexamethasone increased by about four times the risk of cataract progression and the risk of using intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering medications compared to sham (RR 3.89, 95% CI 2.75 to 5.50 and RR 4.54, 95% CI 3.19 to 6.46, respectively; moderate-certainty evidence); about 4 in 10 participants treated with dexamethasone needed IOP-lowering medications. Two trials (451 eyes) compared intravitreal dexamethasone implant 0.7mg with intravitreal antiVEGF (bevacizumab and ranibizumab). There was moderate-certainty evidence that visual acuity improved slightly less with dexamethasone compared with antiVEGF at 12 months (MD 0.07 logMAR, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.09 logMAR; 2 trials; 451 participants/eyes; I² = 0%). The RR of gain of three or more lines of visual acuity was inconsistent between trials, with one trial finding no evidence of a difference between dexamethasone and bevacizumab at 12 months (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.40; 1 trial; 88 eyes), and the other, larger trial finding the chances of vision gain were half with dexamethasone compared with ranibizumab (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.79; 1 trial; 432 participants). The certainty of evidence was low. Cataract progression and the need for IOP-lowering medications increased more than 4 times with dexamethasone implant compared to antiVEGF (moderate-certainty evidence). One trial (560 eyes) compared intravitreal fluocinolone implant 0.19mg with sham. There was moderate-certainty evidence that visual acuity improved slightly more with fluocinolone at 12 months (MD -0.04 logMAR, 95% CI -0.06 to -0.01 logMAR). There was moderate-certainty evidence that an improvement in visual acuity of three or more lines was more common with fluocinolone than with sham at 12 months (RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.78). Fluocinolone also increased the risk of cataract progression (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.35 to 1.97; participants = 335; moderate-certainty evidence), which occurred in about 8 in 10 participants, and the use of IOP-lowering medications (RR 2.72, 95% CI 1.87 to 3.98; participants = 558; moderate-certainty evidence), which were needed in 2 to 3 out of 10 participants. One small trial with 43 participants (69 eyes) compared intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection 4 mg with sham. There may be a benefit in visual acuity at 24 months (MD -0.11 logMAR, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.03 logMAR), but the certainty of evidence is low. Differences in adverse effects were poorly reported in this trial. Two trials (615 eyes) compared intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection 4mg with laser photocoagulation and reached discordant results. The smaller trial (31 eyes followed up to 9 months) found more visual acuity improvement with triamcinolone (MD -0.18 logMAR, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.07 logMAR), but a larger, multicenter trial (584 eyes, 12-month follow-up) found no evidence of a difference regarding change in visual acuity (MD 0.02 logMAR, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.07 logMAR) or gain of three or more lines of visual acuity (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.30) (overall low-certainty evidence). Cataract progression was about three times more likely (RR 2.68, 95% CI 2.21 to 3.24; moderate-certainty evidence) and the use of IOP-lowering medications was about four times more likely (RR 3.92, 95% CI 2.59 to 5.96; participants = 627; studies = 2; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence) with triamcinolone. About 1 in 3 participants needed IOP-lowering medication. One small trial (30 eyes) compared intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection 4mg with intravitreal antiVEGF (bevacizumab or ranibizumab). Visual acuity may be worse with triamcinolone at 12 months (MD 0.18 logMAR, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.26 logMAR); the certainty of evidence is low. Adverse effects were poorly reported in this trial. Four trials reported data on pseudophakic participants, for whom cataract is not a concern. These trials found no decrease in visual acuity in the second treatment year due to cataract progression.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Intravitreal steroids may improve vision in people with DME compared to sham or control. Effects were small, about one line of vision or less in most comparisons. More evidence is available for dexamethasone or fluocinolone implants when compared to sham, and the evidence is limited and inconsistent for the comparison of dexamethasone with antiVEGF treatment. Any benefits should be weighed against IOP elevation, the use of IOP-lowering medication and, in phakic patients, the progression of cataract. The need for glaucoma surgery is also increased, but remains rare.

Comparison of Anatomical and Functional Outcomes of Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant between Phakic and Pseudophakic Eyes with Diabetic Macular Edema

Purpose

To compare the effectiveness of dexamethasone (DEX) intravitreal implants for the treatment of diabetic macular edema between phakic and pseudophakic eyes after a follow-up.

Methods

A total of 79 eyes in 79 patients with diabetic macular edema who were insufficiently responsive to the previous anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment and applied intravitreal DEX implant were included in this retrospective study. The patients were divided into two groups according to their type of lenses: pseudophakic (group 1) and phakic (group 2). Best-corrected visual acuity, intraocular pressure (IOP), retinal nerve fiber layer thickness, and central macular thickness changes in the two groups were compared.

Results

Group 1 comprised 42 eyes in 42 patients with a mean age of 64.02 ± 3.79 years, while group 2 comprised 37 eyes in 37 patients with a mean age of 64.19 ± 5.08 years. In both groups, best-corrected visual acuity improved significantly with a significant decrease in central macular thickness (p < 0.001). In both lens types, the IOP values decreased significantly on the first day but subsequently increased significantly compared to baseline from one week to six months. Increases in IOP values were significantly higher in group 1 at the first week, 1st month, and 6th month compared with group 2. During follow-up, the inferior quadrant retinal nerve fiber layer showed a significant decrease in both groups.

Conclusions

In both phakic and pseudophakic eyes, intravitreal DEX implantation is an effective treatment method with low-risk complications. In our study, the pseudophakic group experienced a significantly earlier increase in IOP and at higher levels than did the phakic group. In light of these data, we suggest that in patients with pseudophakic eyes, follow-ups for IOP should be stricter and started earlier after intravitreal DEX treatment.

Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant (Ozurdex) in Paediatric Patients with Non-infectious Intermediate Uveitis and Related Cystoid Macular Oedema: Evaluation of Macular Morphology and Function with Six-month Follow-up; a Deeper Role of MfERG?

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of Ozurdex implant by analyzing macular morphology and function in pediatric uveitis and related cystoid macular edema (CMO).

METHODS

Main outcomes were visual acuity, mfERG and photopic ERG response, and central macular thickness. Mean values recorded at each time-point were compared to baseline and correlations between functional and anatomical parameters were evaluated.

RESULTS

Resolution of intraocular inflammation and CMO was achieved in all eyes 1 month after implant without procedure or drug-related complications. Mean visual acuity and mfERG amplitude improved showing a statistically significant difference to baseline values for the first 4 months. Mean central macular thickness showed a statistically significant reduction for all follow-up time. Photopic ERG did not vary significantly. Statistically significant correlation was found between trends of visual acuity, central macular thickness, and mfERG responses.

CONCLUSION

Correlation found between macular morphology and function confirms the efficacy of Ozurdex in pediatric uveitis.

Efficacy and safety of intravitreal dexamethasone implant in treatment naïve eyes with diabetic macular edema: Real world experience

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravitreal dexamethasone implant in treatment naïve eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of treatment naïve eyes with DME which received intravitreal dexamethasone implant between January 2016 and March 2018 was done. Demographic details of the patients, ocular examination findings at baseline and on follow up visits were noted. Morphological features of DME and central macular thickness were noted on optical coherence tomography at each visit. The details regarding additional treatment for macular edema on follow up were noted.

RESULTS

Sixty five eyes were included in the study. The mean age was 59.14 ± 9.59 years. The follow up ranged from 6 to 48 months. Psuedophakic eyes showed visual improvement whereas the phakic eyes showed stable vision. The central foveal thickness showed significant reduction (p = 0.05) in all the eyes. The best corrected visual acuity at final follow up (+0.65 logMAR) was slightly less as compared to baseline (+0.62 logMAR). Retreatment was needed in 37% eyes and antiglaucoma medications in 8% eyes. Cataract progression was noted in 24 eyes (37%); 17 eyes (26.1%) underwent surgery. Notably, 27 eyes (41.5%) had some degree of macular ischemia at baseline. And five eyes (7.7%) showed progression of retinopathy leading to vitreous hemorrhage.

CONCLUSION

Dexamethasone implant is helpful in reducing the macular thickness and stabilizing the vision in treatment naïve DME; requiring less number of treatment sessions. However, it does not prevent progression of diabetic retinopathy. The visual improvement may be affected by cataract and macular ischemia.

Retinal thickness fluctuations in patients receiving fluocinolone acetonide implant for diabetic macular edema

Objectives: To evaluate central foveal thickness (CFT) variability and accompanying changes in visual acuity (VA) 12 months before and after treatment with the 190 mcg fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) intravitreal implant for diabetic macular edema (DME).Methods: The Iluvien Clinical Evidence cohort study in the United Kingdom (ICE-UK) investigated the effectiveness of the FAc implant in people treated at 13 hospitals from April 2013 to April 2015. The following parameters were calculated for CFT for each patient: mean, standard deviation (SD), retinal thickness amplitude (RTA, the difference between maximum and minimum values), and coefficient of variation (CV).Results: In 149 eyes with ≥2 CFT observations both before and after FAc implantation, the median VA was 50 ETDRS letters at implantation. Mean CFT was 487 µm at implantation and 135 µm at 12 months post-implant. Before implantation, the mean CV and mean SD for CFT were 24.6% and 112 µm, respectively; the mean RTA was 254 µm. A statistically significant (p < .001) decrease in all three parameters was observed after implantation (18.3%, 68.2 μm and 146 μm, respectively). There was an association between CFT change between extremes and the corresponding change in VA (Pearson's correlation coefficient, r = -0.292, p < .001, prior to the implant; r = -0.379, p < .001, post-implant).Conclusions: After accounting for the reduction in CFT, retinal thickness stabilized following FAc implantation. There might be VA benefits in reducing variability in CFT over time. This merits further exploration but would require more frequent CFT observations in order to properly determine patterns of retinal thickness variability.

Pro Re Nata Dexamethasone Implant for Treatment-Naive Phakic Eyes with Diabetic Macular Edema: A Prospective Study

PURPOSE

To determine the utility and safety of the intravitreal dexamethasone implant as primary therapy (pro re nata [PRN]) in phakic eyes with early treatment-naive diabetic macular edema (DME).

DESIGN

Prospective, case series.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with diabetes mellitus whose eyes were phakic and had early treatment-naive clinically significant macular edema.

METHODS

Patients whose eyes were phakic with DME (<3 months) were included if the central subfield thickness (CST) was >300 μm and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) between 0.3 and 1.0 logarithm of minimum angle of resolution. A comprehensive ocular and systemic examination was performed and the implant injected PRN using a standardized technique. Patients had follow-up at least monthly for 2 years. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze categorical variables in terms of size and proportions. The repeated-measures analysis of variance test was used to determine the change in CDVA, CST, intraocular pressure, and hard exudate area over time.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the determination of the change in CDVA at month 24 from baseline. Secondary outcome measures included determining the change in CST, median number of injections, proportion gaining 15 letters, and complications, if any.

RESULTS

A total of 153 patients (85 males) were included. At 2 years, mean CDVA improved from 0.62 to 0.4 logarithm of minimum angle of resolution, and median CST improved from 397 to 236 μm. The median number of injections was 1.6. Cataract developed in 3 patients with a clear lens, and 31 patients required topical antiglaucoma therapy. Proliferative disease developed in 4 patients, which was managed with panretinal photocoagulation. None of the study patients required rescue therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with treatment-naive phakic eyes who had DME, primary therapy with the intravitreal dexamethasone implant PRN (for 2 years) resulted in significantly improved mean CDVA. A fifth of the patients required control of intraocular pressure, and new-onset cataract developed in 3 of 153 patients.

Macular thickness amplitude changes when switching from discontinuous to continuous therapy for diabetic macular oedema

OBJECTIVE

To investigate if the mean central retinal thickness (CRT) amplitude, measured between visits, is consistently decreased when switching from discontinuous to continuous therapy for diabetic macular oedema (DME) following fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) administration.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In this retrospective cohort study, all patients with DME treated with FAc at a single centre were included. The primary outcome was CRT amplitude changes measured at each visit prior to and after FAc administration. Secondary outcomes included average number of DME treatments before and after FAc injection, visual acuity and intraocular pressure changes.

RESULTS

Nineteen eyes were included. The mean (SD) follow-up after FAc was 399 (222) days. The mean (SD) CRT amplitude before FAc was 194.6 (114.90) µm, and following FAc administration, the amplitude decreased to 70.8 (94.23) µm (95% CI -189.5 to -58.1; p≤0.001). After FAc, the number of treatments required per month significantly decreased from an average of 1 treatment every 2.7 months to every 6 months (p=0.009).

CONCLUSION

In patients with DME, the CRT amplitude values and number of treatments significantly decrease following FAc administration while maintaining vision. Further studies are needed to evaluate the significance of these interesting findings.

Comparison of Once-Daily Bromfenac 0.07% Versus Once-Daily Nepafenac 0.3% in Patients Undergoing Phacoemulsification

AIM

Randomized pilot study comparing clinical outcomes with bromfenac ophthalmic solution 0.07% versus nepafenac 0.3% ophthalmic suspension administered as identical dosing regimens in patients undergoing uncomplicated phacoemulsification with intraocular lens implantation.

METHODS

Forty-nine subjects were treated with bromfenac (n = 25) or nepafenac (n = 24) once daily starting 3 days before cataract surgery, continued on the day of surgery, and for 21 days following surgery, in addition to standard of care. Subjects were followed at 1 day and 7, 21, and 42 days postoperatively. Assessments included best-corrected visual acuity [Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS)], summed ocular inflammation score (SOIS; anterior chamber cells plus flare grading), macular volume and thickness (spectral domain optical coherence tomography), intraocular pressure, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Treatment groups were similar at baseline. Outcomes for mean letters read (p = 0.20), mean change in macular volume (p = 0.98), and retinal thickness (p = 0.93) were not statistically different between the groups at day 42. Mean SOIS dropped markedly and similarly from post-surgical day 1 to day 7 in both treatment groups and was statistically equivalent to baseline in both groups by day 21. At day 42, 87% of subjects in the bromfenac group and 82% of subjects in the nepafenac group demonstrated stable or improved visual acuity. The proportions of eyes with mean retinal thickness of 10 µm or less at days 7, 21, and 42 were similar for the bromfenac (95.8%, 78.3%, 73.9%, respectively) and nepafenac (91.7%, 87.5%, 66.7%) groups (all p = NS, bromfenac vs. nepafenac).

CONCLUSION

Both bromfenac 0.07% and nepafenac 0.3% produced positive and similar clinical outcomes with regard to ETDRS visual acuity post-cataract surgery when dosed using identical regimens. Increases in mean retinal thickness and mean macular volume were small and similar between treatments.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01847638.

FUNDING

Bausch & Lomb Incorporated.

A systematic review and economic evaluation of adalimumab and dexamethasone for treating non-infectious intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis or panuveitis in adults

BACKGROUND

Non-infectious intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis and panuveitis are a heterogeneous group of inflammatory eye disorders. Management includes local and systemic corticosteroids, immunosuppressants and biological drugs.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of subcutaneous adalimumab (Humira^®; AbbVie Ltd, Maidenhead, UK) and a dexamethasone intravitreal implant (Ozurdex^®; Allergan Ltd, Marlow, UK) in adults with non-infectious intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis or panuveitis.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases and clinical trials registries including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched to June 2016, with an update search carried out in October 2016.

REVIEW METHODS

Review methods followed published guidelines. A Markov model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of dexamethasone and adalimumab, each compared with current practice, from a NHS and Personal Social Services (PSS) perspective over a lifetime horizon, parameterised with published evidence. Costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5%. Substantial sensitivity analyses were undertaken.

RESULTS

Of the 134 full-text articles screened, three studies (four articles) were included in the clinical effectiveness review. Two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) [VISUAL I (active uveitis) and VISUAL II (inactive uveitis)] compared adalimumab with placebo, with limited standard care also provided in both arms. Time to treatment failure (reduced visual acuity, intraocular inflammation, new vascular lesions) was longer in the adalimumab group than in the placebo group, with a hazard ratio of 0.50 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.70; p < 0.001] in the VISUAL I trial and 0.57 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.84; p = 0.004) in the VISUAL II trial. The adalimumab group showed a significantly greater improvement than the placebo group in the 25-item Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-25) composite score in the VISUAL I trial (mean difference 4.20; p = 0.010) but not the VISUAL II trial (mean difference 2.12; p = 0.16). Some systemic adverse effects occurred more frequently with adalimumab than with placebo. One RCT [HURON (active uveitis)] compared a single 0.7-mg dexamethasone implant against a sham procedure, with limited standard care also provided in both arms. Dexamethasone provided significant benefits over the sham procedure at 8 and 26 weeks in the percentage of patients with a vitreous haze score of zero (p < 0.014), the mean best corrected visual acuity improvement (p ≤ 0.002) and the percentage of patients with a ≥ 5-point improvement in VFQ-25 score (p < 0.05). Raised intraocular pressure and cataracts occurred more frequently with dexamethasone than with the sham procedure. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for one dexamethasone implant in one eye for a combination of patients with unilateral and bilateral uveitis compared with limited current practice, as per the HURON trial, was estimated to be £19,509 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The ICER of adalimumab for patients with mainly bilateral uveitis compared with limited current practice, as per the VISUAL trials, was estimated to be £94,523 and £317,547 per QALY gained in active and inactive uveitis respectively. Sensitivity analyses suggested that the rate of blindness has the biggest impact on the model results. The interventions may be more cost-effective in populations in which there is a greater risk of blindness.

LIMITATIONS

The clinical trials did not fully reflect clinical practice. Thirteen additional studies of clinically relevant comparator treatments were identified; however, network meta-analysis was not feasible. The model results are highly uncertain because of the limited evidence base.

CONCLUSIONS

Two RCTs of systemic adalimumab and one RCT of a unilateral, single dexamethasone implant showed significant benefits over placebo or a sham procedure. The ICERs for adalimumab were estimated to be above generally accepted thresholds for cost-effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness of dexamethasone was estimated to fall below standard thresholds. However, there is substantial uncertainty around the model assumptions. In future work, primary research should compare dexamethasone and adalimumab with current treatments over the long term and in important subgroups and consider how short-term improvements relate to long-term effects on vision.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016041799.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Transscleral Suture-Fixated Versus Intrascleral Haptic-Fixated Intraocular Lens: A Comparative Study

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical outcomes between sutured transscleral-fixated and intrascleral haptic-fixated posterior chamber intraocular lens (IOL).

SETTING

Dr Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi.

DESIGN

A comparative case series.

METHODS

Forty eyes of 40 patients were included; 20 in each group. Patients in group 1 underwent sutured transscleral-fixated IOL and those in group 2 underwent intrascleral haptic-fixated IOL augmented by fibrin glue. Parameters evaluated were uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), central macular thickness (CMT), IOL tilt on ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM), and pseudophakodonesis on slitlamp and UBM.

RESULTS

The most common cause of aphakia was complicated cataract surgery (50%). The mean preoperative UCVA in logarithm of minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) was 1.59±0.24 and 1.63±0.26 in group 1 and 2, respectively (P=0.45). There was significant improvement in UCVA in both groups (P=0.001) at 6 months (group 1: 0.33±0.17; group 2: 0.22±0.10); the improvement being greater in group 2 (P<0.05). Mean percentage endothelial cell loss and IOP change were comparable. Mean CMT (μm) was 250.95±23.98 and 225.85±21.13 in group 1 and 2, respectively (P=0.009). Pseudophakodonesis was more in group 1 as assessed on slitlamp (P=0.037) and as assessed on UBM (P=0.046). Macular edema was the most common complication seen more in group 1.

CONCLUSIONS

Intrascleral haptic-fixated IOL provides more stable fixation, better visual outcome, and lesser complication in comparison with sutured transscleral-fixated IOL.

Intravitreal dexamethasone implants for diabetic macular edema

AIM

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a dexamethasone (DEX) intravitreal implant for diabetic macular edema (DME).

METHODS

Totally 113 eyes of 84 patients were divided in three subgroups: naive patients (n=11), pseudophakic patients (n=72) and phakic patients (n=30). Inclusive criterion comprised adult diabetic patients with central fovea thickening and impaired visual acuity resulting from DME for whom previous standard treatments showed no improvement in both central macular thickness (CMT) and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) after at least 3mo of treatment. Outcome data were obtained from patient visits at baseline and at months 1, 3, 5, 9 and 12 after the first DEX implant injection. At each of these visits, patients underwent measurement of BCVA, a complete eye examination and measurement of CMT and macular volume (MV) carried out with optical coherence tomography (OCT) images.

RESULTS

Seventy-three eyes (64.5%) received a single implant, 30 (26.5%) received two implants and 10 (9%) received three implants. At baseline, average in BCVA, CMT and MV were 43.5±20.8, 462.8±145 and 12.6±2.5 respectively. These values improved significantly at 1mo (BCVA: 47.2±19.5, CMT: 339.6±120, MV: 11.11±1.4) and 3mo (BCVA: 53.2±18.1, CMT: 353.8±141, MV: 11.3±1.3) (P≤0.05). At 5mo (BCVA: 50.9±19.8, CMT: 425±150, MV: 12.27±2.3), 9mo (BCVA: 48.4±17.6, CMT: 445.5±170, MV: 12.5±2.3) and 12mo (BCVA: 47.7±18.8, CMT: 413.2±149, MV: 12.03±2.5), improvements in the three parameters were no longer statistically significant and decreased progressively but did not reach baseline values. There were no clinical differences between subgroups. Ocular complications were minimal.

CONCLUSION

Patients with DEX implants show maximum efficacy at 3mo which then declined progressively, but is still better than baseline values at the end of follow-up.

Combined Phacoemulsification and Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant (Ozurdex®) in Diabetic Patients with Coexisting Cataract and Diabetic Macular Edema

PURPOSE

To investigate the effectiveness and safety of combined phacoemulsification and dexamethasone intravitreal implant in patients with cataract and diabetic macular edema.

METHODS

In this two-center, retrospective, single-group study, the charts of 16 consecutive patients who underwent combined phacoemulsification and intravitreal dexamethasone implant were retrospectively reviewed. These 16 patients, 7 men and 9 women, were observed at least 3 months of follow-up. Primary outcome was the change of the central retinal thickness (CRT); secondary outcome was the change of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA). Any ocular complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Mean CRT decreased significantly from 486 ± 152.4 μm at baseline to 365.5 ± 91 μm at 30 days (p = .005), to 326 ± 80 μm at 60 days (p = .0004), and to 362 ± 134 μm at 90 days (p = .001). Mean BCVA was 20/105 (logMAR, 0.72 ± 0.34) at baseline and improved significantly (p ≤ .007) at all postsurgery time points. One case of ocular hypertension was observed and successfully managed with topical therapy. No endophthalmitis or other ocular complications were observed.

CONCLUSION

Intravitreal slow-release dexamethasone implant combined with cataract surgery may be an effective approach on morphologic and functional outcomes for patients with cataract and diabetic macular edema for at least three months after surgery.

CORRELATION BETWEEN CENTRAL FOVEAL THICKNESS AND VISUAL ACUITY IN PATIENTS WITH IDIOPATHIC VITREOMACULAR TRACTION

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of preoperative central foveal thickness (CFT) on visual acuity after surgery in patients with idiopathic vitreomacular traction and to calculate a cut-off value in preoperative CFT.

METHODS

Thirty-five patients with idiopathic vitreomacular traction were evaluated retrospectively. A complete ophthalmological examination including spectral domain optical coherence tomography was performed preoperatively and at 12 months after the surgery. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to determine the critical point for the CFT associated with improvement of 10 or more letters in visual acuity on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study.

RESULTS

Among 35 patients, the mean CFT at postoperative 12 months was significantly decreased from baseline (P = 0.001). Preoperative CFT and visual improvement were not significantly correlated (r = -0.090, P = 0.605), whereas preoperative CFT and preoperative visual acuity were significantly correlated (r = 0.757, P < 0.001). Improvement in CFT and visual improvement were also correlated significantly (r = 0.449, P = 0.007). According to the receiver operating characteristic analysis, the threshold CFT was 471 μm. When 15 patients with CFT thickness under 471 μm were evaluated, preoperative CFT was significantly correlated with improvement in visual acuity after the surgery (r = 0.561, P = 0.030).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative CFT is important for the visual prognosis of patients with vitreomacular traction. Preoperative CFT of these patients should be considered in surgical decisions.

[Features associated with retinal thickness extension in diabetic macular oedema]

BACKGROUND

Clinically significant macular edema has features that are associated with a major risk of visual loss, with thickening that involves the centre of the macula, field 7 or visual deficiency, although it is unknown if these features are related to retinal thickness extension.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An observational, analytical, prospective, cross-sectional and open study was conducted. The sample was divided into initial visual acuity ≥0.5, central field thickness, center point thickness, field 7 and macular volume more than the reported 2 standard deviation mean value in eyes without retinopathy. The extension was determined by the number of the central field area equivalent thickening and these features were compared with by Student's t test for independent samples.

RESULTS

A total of 199 eyes were included. In eyes with visual acuity of ≥0.5, the mean extension was 2.88±1.68 and 3.2±1.63 in area equivalent in eyes with visual acuity <0.5 (p=0.12). The mean extension in eyes with less than 2 standard deviation of central field thickness, center point thickness, field 7 and macular volume was significantly lower than in eyes with more than 2 standard deviations (1.9±0.93 vs. 4.07±1.49, 2.44±1.47 vs. 3.94±1.52, 1.79±1.07 vs. 3.61±1.57 and 1.6±0.9 vs. 3.9±1.4, respectively, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The extension of retinal thickness is related with the anatomical features reported with a greater risk of visual loss, but is not related to initial visual deficiency.

Efficacy and safety of different doses of a slow-release corticosteroid implant for macular edema: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy and safety of intravitreal corticosteroid implants for macular edema.

Methods

A total of 3,586 patients from previously reported randomized controlled trials were included. The meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2. Summary odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated, employing random-effects or fixed-effects models according to between-study heterogeneity. The main outcome measures were the ORs for effects and safety of intravitreal corticosteroid implants.

Results

Four eligible studies were included. Compared with the sham group, the ORs for ≥15 letter improvement of visual acuity in the high-dose and low-dose groups were 1.89 (95% CI 1.33–2.69, P=0.0004) and 1.62 (95% CI 1.10–2.41, P=0.02), respectively. The weight mean differences in central retinal thickness increases were −75.46 (95% CI −90.29, −60.63, P<0.0001) and −46.47 (95% CI −92.08, −0.86, P=0.05), respectively. However, the ORs for increased intraocular pressure in both intervention groups were higher than in the sham group, and were 11.50 (95% CI 7.24–18.28, P<0.00001) and 10.30 (95% CI 6.49–16.36, P<0.00001), respectively. The incidence of cataract was 7.25 (95% CI 5.68–9.25, P<0.00001) and 3.56 (95% CI 1.28–9.96, P=0.02) in the two intervention groups, respectively. There was no significant difference between the intervention groups except for the incidence of cataract in which the OR was 1.59 (95% CI 1.28–1.97, P<0.001).

Conclusion

Intravitreal corticosteroid implants are effective in treating macular edema. However, the efficacy is not related to corticosteroid dose.

Comparison of dexamethasone intravitreal implant and intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide for the treatment of pseudophakic cystoid macular edema in diabetic patients

Background and objective

Our objective was to investigate the efficacy and safety of dexa methasone (DEX) implant for the treatment of pseudophakic cystoid macular edema (PCME) in diabetic patients.

Study design

This was a prospective, non-randomized, interventional case series of 43 participants. Eighteen patients were enrolled in the DEX implant group and 25 were enrolled in an intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) group.

Main outcome measures

The primary efficacy measurement was the percentage of patients who gained improvements of more than ten letters in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) during 6 months of follow-up. Other efficacy measurements included change in BCVA, change in central macular thickness (CMT), and number of retreatments. The primary safety evaluation was the percentage of patients with intraocular hypertension and variation in intraocular pressure (IOP) during 6 months of follow-up. Other adverse events, such as conjunctival hemorrhage, eye pain, secondary infection, endophthalmitis, noninfectious inflammation, retinal detachment, and implant migration, were also recorded during follow-up.

Results

At month 1, we observed that the percentage of patients gaining improvement of more than ten letters was similar in both groups (P=0.625). As patients in the IVTA group were retreated several times, this effect persisted throughout the study (P=0.941 at month 2, P=0.553 at month 3, P=0.856 at month 6). Variations in CMT were noticed at week 1 and reached their maximum at month 1. No significant difference was found between the two groups (P=0.831 at week 1, P=0.783 at month 1). At month 1, the variation in IOP reached its maximum in the DEX implant group and then decreased slightly. However, in the IVTA group, it increased continuously throughout the study. Conjunctival hemorrhage and eye pain were found in both groups, but both were rated as mild in severity, and no significant difference was found (P=0.184, P=0.766, respectively).

Conclusion

Both IVTA and DEX implants could effectively restore visual function and recover morphological change in diabetic patients with PCME for at least 6 months, but repeated intravitreal injection was required in the IVTA group. DEX implant is well tolerated. We suggest that intravitreal injection of DEX implant is a promising new therapeutic option for diabetic patients with PCME.

Efficacy and safety of two or more dexamethasone intravitreal implant injections for treatment of macular edema related to retinal vein occlusion (Shasta study)

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and reinjection interval of dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX implant) in branch retinal vein occlusion and central retinal vein occlusion patients receiving ≥ 2 DEX implant treatments.

METHODS

Multicenter (26-site), retrospective chart review study. Data were collected from baseline (at first DEX implant) through 3 months to 6 months after last DEX implant.

RESULTS

Patients (n = 289) received 2 to 9 (mean, 3.2) DEX implants as monotherapy (29.1% of patients) or with adjunctive treatments/procedures. Mean duration of macular edema before first DEX implant was 18.4 months. Mean reinjection interval was 5.6 months. Mean peak change in best-corrected visual acuity from baseline through 4 weeks to 20 weeks after final DEX implant was +1.0 line (P < 0.001). Best-corrected visual acuity and central retinal thickness improved significantly from baseline after each of the first 6 DEX implant injections (P ≤ 0.037); 59.7% of branch retinal vein occlusion and 66.7% of central retinal vein occlusion patients achieved ≥ 2-line best-corrected visual acuity improvement. Intraocular pressure increase (≥ 10 mmHg) occurred in 32.6% of patients; 29.1% used intraocular pressure-lowering medication to treat increases associated with DEX implant. Only 1.7% of patients required incisional glaucoma surgery.

CONCLUSION

Retinal vein occlusion patients treated with multiple DEX implant injections, either alone or combined with other therapies, had improved central retinal thickness and visual acuity with each subsequent injection. No new safety concerns developed with multiple implants.

Dexamethasone intravitreal implant in combination with laser photocoagulation for the treatment of diffuse diabetic macular edema

PURPOSE

To evaluate Ozurdex (dexamethasone intravitreal implant [DEX implant]; Allergan, Inc, Irvine, CA) 0.7 mg combined with laser photocoagulation compared with laser alone for treatment of diffuse diabetic macular edema (DME).

DESIGN

Randomized, controlled, multicenter, double-masked, parallel-group, 12-month trial.

PARTICIPANTS

Two hundred fifty-three patients with retinal thickening and impaired vision resulting from diffuse DME in at least 1 eye (the study eye) were enrolled.

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomized to treatment in the study eye with DEX implant at baseline plus laser at month 1 (combination treatment; n = 126) or sham implant at baseline and laser at month 1 (laser alone; n = 127) and could receive up to 3 additional laser treatments and 1 additional DEX implant or sham treatment as needed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary efficacy variable was the percentage of patients who had a 10-letter or more improvement in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline at month 12. Other key efficacy variables included the change in BCVA from baseline and the area of vessel leakage evaluated with fluorescein angiography. Safety variables included adverse events and intraocular pressure (IOP).

RESULTS

The percentage of patients who gained 10 letters or more in BCVA at month 12 did not differ between treatment groups, but the percentage of patients was significantly greater in the combination group at month 1 (P<0.001) and month 9 (P = 0.007). In patients with angiographically verified diffuse DME, the mean improvement in BCVA was significantly greater with DEX implant plus laser treatment than with laser treatment alone (up to 7.9 vs. 2.3 letters) at all time points through month 9 (P ≤ 0.013). Decreases in the area of diffuse vascular leakage measured angiographically were significantly larger with DEX implant plus laser treatment through month 12 (P ≤ 0.041). Increased IOP was more common with combination treatment. No surgeries for elevated IOP were required.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant between-group difference at month 12. However, significantly greater improvement in BCVA, as demonstrated by changes from baseline at various time points up to 9 months and across time based on the area under the curve analysis, occurred in patients with diffuse DME treated with DEX implant plus laser than in patients treated with laser alone.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Optical coherence tomography in retinitis pigmentosa: reproducibility and capacity to detect macular and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness alterations

PURPOSE

To evaluate the ability of time-domain and Fourier-domain optical coherence tomographies (OCTs) to detect macular and retinal nerve fiber layer atrophies in retinitis pigmentosa (RP). To test the intrasession reproducibility using three OCT instruments (Stratus, Cirrus, and Spectralis).

METHODS

Eighty eyes of 80 subjects (40 RP patients and 40 healthy subjects) underwent a visual field examination, together with 3 macular scans and 3 optic disk evaluations by the same experienced examiner using 3 OCT instruments. Differences between healthy and RP eyes were compared. The relationship between measurements with each OCT instrument was evaluated. Repeatability was studied by intraclass correlation coefficients and coefficients of variation.

RESULTS

Macular and retinal nerve fiber layer atrophies were detected in RP patients for all OCT parameters. Macular and retinal nerve fiber layer thicknesses, as determined by the different OCTs, were correlated but significantly different (P < 0.05). Reproducibility was moderately high using Stratus, good using Cirrus and Spectralis, and excellent using the Tru-track technology of Spectralis. In RP eyes, measurements showed higher variability compared with healthy eyes.

CONCLUSION

Differences in thickness measurements existed between OCT instruments, despite there being a high degree of correlation. Fourier-domain OCT can be considered a valid and repeatability technique to detect retinal nerve fiber layer atrophy in RP patients.

Comparison of bromfenac 0.09% QD to nepafenac 0.1% TID after cataract surgery: pilot evaluation of visual acuity, macular volume, and retinal thickness at a single site

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes of bromfenac ophthalmic solution 0.09% once daily (QD) and nepafenac 0.1% ophthalmic suspension three times daily following cataract extraction with posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation, specifically looking at any differences in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study visual acuities, macular volume, and/or retinal thickness changes.

Methods

Subjects were randomly assigned to receive either bromfenac (n = 10) QD or nepafenac (n = 10) three times daily. Dosing began 3 days before cataract surgery, continuing to day 21 postsurgery. In addition to the investigated nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug regimen, all subjects received antiinfective intraoperative and postoperative standard of care. Subjects were followed at 1 day and 1, 3, and 6 weeks postoperatively. Study visit assessments included best-corrected visual acuity, biomicroscopy, summed ocular inflammation score (anterior chamber cells and flare grading), intraocular pressure measurement, adverse event recording, and concomitant medication review. Optical coherence tomography was performed at 1, 3, and 6 weeks.

Results

Both treatment groups had similar baseline measurements. Outcomes for mean letters read (P = 0.318), mean change in macular volume (P = 0.665), and retinal thickness (P = 0.552) were not statistically different between the groups from baseline through week six, although independently only the bromfenac group demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in letters gained from baseline to week six (P = 0.040). In the same time period, mean macular volume and retinal thickening worsened in the nepafenac group, demonstrating a statistically significant increase (P = 0.006) at week six for macular volume when compared to baseline. One subject in the nepafenac group experienced recurrent inflammation at week six, was unmasked, and then rescued with bromfenac 0.09% QD and difluprednate 0.05% QD.

Conclusion

Both bromfenac and nepafenac resulted in positive clinical outcomes of Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study visual acuities. Postoperative measurements of macular volume and retinal thickness of bromfenac subjects showed a trend toward improved vision, less retinal thickening, and more stable macular volumes overall.

Ophthalmic features of systemic diseases

The eye is intricately integrated with the functions of the body. Ocular changes may precede or run concurrently with various systemic conditions and often represent important prognostic indicators of disease progression. In addition to a thorough diagnostic evaluation and treatment of underlying processes, individuals with systemic diseases and concurrent ocular changes may need comprehensive ophthalmic examination to reduce the risk of visual impairment and morbidity. In this review the authors highlight the clinically relevant ocular signs that occur parallel with systemic conditions. In particular, the study focuses on the varied clinical presentations that can lead to rapid diagnosis to improve management of eye disorders that accompany systemic diseases.

External limiting membrane as a predictor of visual improvement in diabetic macular edema after pars plana vitrectomy

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the predictors of visual improvement using spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) in eyes with resistant diabetic macular edema (DME) treated with pars plana vitrectomy.

METHODS

Thirty-four eyes with resistant DME were evaluated in a retrospective manner. Several SD-OCT variables including photoreceptor inner segment/outer segment (IS/OS) junction, external limiting membrane (ELM) integrity, and central macular thickness (CMT) before and after the surgery, were evaluated by two experienced observers, masked to visual acuity. The visual improvement was used as the outcome measure for a stepwise regression, while the OCT factors were used as predictors.

RESULTS

The strongest predictor of vision improvement was pre-operative damage to the ELM (p = 0.0277) compared to IS/OS junction (p = 0.03). Pretreatment central macular thickness was a very weak predictor (p = 0.18) of visual improvement. For each percentage increase of ELM integrity there was a 0.13 letter gain in vision. ELM integrity explained 16% of the visual acuity improvement after treatment, which rose to 21% with the addition of CMT. The addition of IS/OS junction in the model did not add predictive information.

CONCLUSIONS

Evaluation of ELM preoperatively predicts the vision improvement more accurately than the IS/OS junction and CMT in eyes with DME.