Photodynamic therapy in highly myopic eyes with choroidal neovascularization: 5 years of follow-up

Chorioretinal Atrophic Lesions Evolution in Patients with Quiescent Myopic Choroidal Neovascularization Followed for More Than 10 Years

Purpose

To evaluate the progression of chorioretinal atrophic areas associated with myopic choroidal neovascularization (CNV) in high myopic patients followed by a minimum period of 10 years.

Patients and Methods

Patients with myopic CNV lesions that achieved clinical and structural remissions over 10 years of follow-up were included. Medical records were reviewed for CNV characterization and treatment, best-corrected visual acuity at baseline (BCVA0), immediately after the last treatment (BCVA1) and at the latest visit (BCVA2). Fundus autofluorescence (FAF) was used to quantify the amount of atrophic area increase per year associated with the treated myopic CNV lesion. The first FAF performed after treatment suspension (FAF1) was compared with the most recent exam (FAF2).

Results

Thirty-six eyes from 36 patients were included. Mean total follow-up was 12.38 ± 2.68 years. Mean number of intravitreal injections (IVI) was 12.50 ± 12.40 and 25% of the eyes had previous treatment with photodynamic therapy (PDT). Mean improvement between BCVA0 and BCVA1 was 5.58 ± 15.98 letters (p < 0.001). However, a drop of 8.03 ± 12.25 letters was noticed between BCVA1 and BCVA2. FAF1 was 6.34 ± 4.92mm2 and increased to 9.88 ± 7.56mm2 (3.54 ± 3.79mm2 variation p < 0.001). The mean growth rate of the atrophic area was 0.89 ± 0.84mm2 per year. BCVA2 negatively correlated with FAF2 (k = -0.498, p = 0.002) being worse in patients with higher atrophic area growth rate (k = -0.341, p = 0.042). Eyes treated with PDT needed less IVI (5.89 ± 5.21 vs 14.70 ± 13.36, p = 0.008) but had larger FAF1 (9.80 ± 5.33 vs 5.19 ± 4.27, p = 0.013) and FAF2 (16.05 ± 7.10 vs 7.83 ± 6.63, p = 0.003). Hypothyroidism was associated with higher atrophy growth rate (1.55 ± 1.15 vs 0.73 ± 0.67, p = 0.016).

Conclusion

This research demonstrates the importance of chorioretinal atrophy progression after myopic CNV lesions regression and its impact on visual prognosis, reporting a mean yearly growth of 0.89 mm2 in atrophic areas. Previous treatment with PDT and hypothyroidism were identified as risk factors associated with larger atrophic areas and worse visual outcomes.

Long-term outcomes of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy with and without posterior scleral reinforcement on myopic maculopathy in myopic choroidal neovascularization eyes

BACKGROUND

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy is used for myopic choroidal neovascularization (mCNV). Patchy chorioretinal atrophy (pCRA) enlargement has been reported in mCNV cases associated with vision loss. Our aim was to compare the long-term effectiveness of anti-VEGF therapy alone versus anti-VEGF followed by posterior scleral reinforcement (PSR) in controlling myopic maculopathy in mCNV eyes.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of the medical records of 95 high myopia patients (refractive error ≥ 6.00 diopters, axial length ≥ 26.0 mm) with mCNV. Patients were treated with anti-VEGF alone (group A) or anti-VEGF followed by PSR (group B). The following data were collected: refractive error, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), ophthalmic fundus examination, ocular coherence tomography and ocular biometry at 12 and 24 months pre- and postoperatively. The primary outcomes were changes in pCRA and BCVA.

RESULTS

In 26 eyes of 24 patients, the mean pCRA size significantly increased from baseline (0.88 ± 1.69 mm2) to 12 months (1.57 ± 2.32 mm2, t = 3.249, P = 0.003) and 24 months (2.17 ± 2.79 mm2, t = 3.965, P = 0.001) postoperatively. The increase in perilesional pCRA in group B (n = 12) was 98.2% and 94.2% smaller than that in group A (n = 14) at 12 and 24 months (Beta 0.57 [95% CI 0.01, 191 1.13], P = 0.048). In group B, 7 eyes (58.3%) gained more than 2 lines of BCVA compared with only 4 eyes (28.6%) in group A at 24 months.

CONCLUSION

Anti-VEGF therapy followed by PSR achieved better outcomes than anti-VEGF therapy alone in controlling the development of myopic maculopathy in mCNV and may constitute a better treatment option by securing a better long-term VA outcome.

A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines for myopic macular degeneration

Background

Myopic macular degeneration (MMD) is a primary cause of blindness and visual impairment in many parts of the world. A review of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for intervention selection are required with the increasing demand for MMD management in clinical practice as well as in national health services. Therefore, we aim to systematically review CPGs for MMD and assist the recommendations development of the Package of Eye Care Interventions (PECI) program of the World Health Organization.

Methods

A systematic review of CPGs published on MMD between 2010 and April 2020 was conducted. Guidelines were evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool. Cochrane systematic reviews were also included when the evidence from included CPGs were inadequate or contradict.

Results

After applying exclusion criteria and conducting the quality appraisal, two CPGs were finally included. The average of the AGREE II ratings for the identified Guidelines were 56 and 63 respectively (7 for each item). To provide further information on interventions for MMD, one Cochrane review on MMD was additionally identified and included in the study. Intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) drugs were recommended for patients with myopic choroidal neovascularization (mCNV) as first-line therapy to improve vision and reduce central macular thickness, and ranibizumab showed significant effectiveness compared to photodynamic therapy (PDT). PDT was recommended to be performed in those resistant to the treatment by one CPG but lacked of adequate description and support. Data extracted from the Cochrane systematic reviews indicated that anti-VEGF therapy for mCNV had significant effectiveness in improving visual acuity and reducing CMT compared to PDT with moderate to low certainty of evidence. Ranibizumab and bevacizumab were considered as equally effective with moderate certainty.

Conclusions

The outcomes of this review suggest that high quality clinical practice guidelines for MMD management are limited. Intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF agents was recommended as an effective intervention to treat myopic CNV as the first-line treatment, while there was inadequate guidance for the application of PDT in myopic CNV management. The use of other interventions for MMD were not recommended at this time and additional evidence is called for.

Myopic maculopathy: Current status and proposal for a new classification and grading system (ATN)

Myopia is a highly frequent ocular disorder worldwide and pathologic myopia is the 4th most common cause of irreversible blindness in developed countries. Pathologic myopia is especially common in East Asian countries. Ocular alterations associated with pathologic myopia, especially those involving the macular area-defined as myopic maculopathy-are the leading causes of vision loss in patients with pathologic myopia. High myopia is defined as the presence of a highly negative refractive error (>-6 to -8 diopters) in the context of eye elongation (26-26.5 mm). Although the terms high myopia and pathologic myopia are often used interchangeably, they do not refer to the same eye disease. The two key factors driving the development of pathologic myopia are: 1) elongation of the axial length and 2) posterior staphyloma. The presence of posterior staphyloma, which is the most common finding in patients with pathologic myopia, is the key differentiating factor between high and pathologic myopia. The occurrence of staphyloma will, in most cases, eventually lead to other conditions such as atrophic, traction, or neovascular maculopathy. Posterior staphyloma is for instance, responsible for the differences between a myopic macular hole (MH)-with and without retinal detachment-and idiopathic MH. Posterior staphyloma typically induces retinal layer splitting, leading to foveoschisis in myopic MH, an important differentiating factor between myopic and emmetropic MH. Myopic maculopathy is a highly complex disease and current classification systems do not fully account for the numerous changes that occur in the macula of these patients. Therefore, a more comprehensive classification system is needed, for several important reasons. First, to more precisely define the disease stage to improve follow-up by enabling clinicians to more accurately monitor changes over time, which is essential given the progressive nature of this condition. Second, unification of the currently-available classification systems would establish standardized classification criteria that could be used to compare the findings from international multicentric studies. Finally, a more comprehensive classification system could help to improve our understanding of the genetic origins of this disease, which is clearly relevant given the interchangeable-but erroneous-use of the terms high and pathologic myopia in genetic research.

Pharmacotherapy of Myopic Choroidal Neovascularization

BACKGROUND

Myopic choroidal neovascularization (CNV) is a common cause of central visual loss in patients with high myopia, and the most common form of CNV in younger individuals. Pharmacologic therapy is the current mainstay of treatment of these patients.

METHODS

Review of pharmacological treatment options for myopic CNV, which primarily involves intravitreal administration of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents.

RESULTS

At this time, anti-VEGF therapy agents are the first-line therapy in these patients. Comparative trials have not identified any major differences in treatment outcomes between aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab. Only ranibizumab is approved for this indication in the US. Best visual outcomes are associated with younger age, smaller lesion size, and absence of chorioretinal atrophy.

CONCLUSION

Anti-VEGF therapy is generally very effective in the treatment of myopic CNV.

Cost of myopic patients with and without myopic choroidal neovascularisation

OBJECTIVE

To study the costs associated with high myopia (HM) with choroidal neovascularisation (mCNV) or without mCNV.

METHODS

Observational, retrospective, cross-sectional, and multicentre study (HM and mCNV) conducted on adult patients. Annualised medical direct cost (MDC) from the perspective of the National Health System, the non-medical direct cost (nMDC) from the patient perspective, and productivity losses were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 137 mCNV and 48 HM patients were included (mean age [SD]: 55.1 [2.8] vs. 54.7 [13.8]; P=.2), with 80% women in both groups. The observation time (months) ranged from 17.9 (9.6) right eye (RE) and 20.0 (9.7), left eye (LE) in mCNV and 47.1 (21.5) RE/45.5 (20.7) LE in MM. A higher percentage of emergency room visits was observed in mCNV vs. HM patients (41.7 vs. 25%; P=.06) and retinal specialists (91.2 vs. 77.1%; P=.01). The MDC was higher in mCNV: € 1,985 (95% CI: 1772-2198) vs. € 356 (251-480) HM, P<.001. The nMDC was also higher in mCNV: € 256 (11-524) vs. €19 (11-26) HM, P>.4. The number of affected eyes, the follow-up time, and the mCNV were factors associated with direct costs. The impact on work productivity was higher in mCNV (quite/very concerned): 27.7 vs. 10.4% HM. The mCNV showed a significant association with activity impairment (OR: 3.47, 95% CI: 10.101-1.195).

CONCLUSIONS

mCNV involves higher medical costs than HM. In addition, mCNV patients have a greater need of care and assistive devices, and greater impact of the disease in their work productivity.

Current and emerging treatment options for myopic choroidal neovascularization

Choroidal neovascularization (CNV) is the main cause of visual impairment in highly myopic patients younger than 50 years of age. There are different treatments for myopic CNV (mCNV), with 5- to 10-year outcomes currently. Chorioretinal atrophy is still the most important determinant factor for visual outcome. The purpose of this study is to provide an overview of the current treatments for mCNV, including laser, surgical management, verteporfin photodynamic therapy, and mainly anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy. Emerging treatment options are also discussed.

Myopic choroidal neovascularisation: current concepts and update on clinical management

Choroidal neovascularisation (CNV) is a common vision-threatening complication of myopia and pathological myopia. Despite significant advances in understanding the epidemiology, pathogenesis and natural history of myopic CNV, there is no standard definition of myopic CNV and its relationship to axial length and other myopic degenerative changes. Several treatments are available to ophthalmologists, but with the advent of new therapies there is a need for further consensus and clinical management recommendations. Verteporfin photodynamic therapy has been an established treatment for subfoveal myopic CNV for many years, but this treatment does not restore visual acuity and is associated with long-term chorioretinal atrophy. More recently, clinical trials investigating the efficacy and safety of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents in patients with myopic CNV have demonstrated substantial visual acuity gains and quality of life increases compared with photodynamic therapy. These enhanced outcomes provide updated evidence-based clinical management guidelines of myopic CNV, and increase the need for a generally accepted definition for myopic CNV. This review critically summarises the latest myopic CNV literature in the context of clinical experience and recommends a myopic CNV treatment algorithm.

Management of Choroidal Neovascularization Secondary to Pathological Myopia: The Era of Changes

Choroidal neovascularization (CNV) secondary to pathological myopia is an important cause of significant visual impairment in young adults. High myopia is particularly prevalent in Asian population. New scientific contributions have been made to the understanding of high myopia and myopic CNV. Treatment for myopic CNV has previously relied on photodynamic therapy, laser photocoagulation, and submacular surgery. The treatment outcomes from these modalities are, however, controversial. The introduction of antiangiogenic agents including bevacizumab and ranibizumab has brought the treatment of myopic CNV into a new era. The purpose of this review was to provide an overview of the natural history of myopic CNV, the prognostic factors, and the various treatment options including laser photocoagulation and photodynamic therapy, with particular attention on antiangiogenic agents.

Comparison of foveal-sparing with foveal-involving photodynamic therapy for myopic choroidal neovascularization

PURPOSE

To evaluate the visual outcomes of choroidal neovascularization (CNV) secondary to pathological myopia in eyes treated with photodynamic therapy (PDT), and to determine the effect of lesion location and foveal involvement on visual prognosis.

METHODS

Interventional case series of 24 consecutive patients with myopic CNV treated with PDT. The main outcome measure was final LogMAR visual acuity (VA).

RESULTS

Of 24 eyes, the CNV lesion was subfoveal in 11 and extrafoveal in 13. Overall, the mean LogMAR VA at 24 months was 0.72. Extrafoveal CNV lesions achieved significantly better final VA compared with subfoveal CNV (LogMAR 0.45 vs 1.05, P=0.012). Eyes with extrafoveal CNV lesions were subdivided into foveal-sparing PDT (where the PDT laser spot did not involve the foveal center) and foveal-involved PDT (where the PDT laser covered the fovea). At all time points, the group with foveal-sparing PDT had significantly better VA compared with the foveal-involved group. The final LogMAR VA for the foveal-sparing PDT group was 0.26 compared with 1.00 for the foveal-involved PDT group (P=0.003). At 24 months, 77.8% of foveal-sparing PDT cases achieved VA of ≥ 20/40, compared with 25% of foveal-involved PDT cases and 9.1% of subfoveal CNV lesions (P=0.006).

CONCLUSION

For patients with myopic CNV, foveal-sparing PDT results in significantly better long-term visual outcomes compared with those with foveal-involved PDT. Foveal-sparing PDT may be of value for treatment of myopic CNV patients who are not suitable for treatment with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections.

Long-term outcome of intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy with bevacizumab or ranibizumab as primary treatment for subfoveal myopic choroidal neovascularization

PURPOSE

To evaluate the long-term efficacy of intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy as primary treatment for subfoveal myopic choroidal neovascularization (CNV).

METHODS

In all, 37 treatment-naïve eyes of 37 patients with subfoveal myopic CNV who received intravitreal bevacizumab (n=22) or ranibizumab (n=15) injections with at least 2 years of follow-up were reviewed. All eyes received initial three loading doses of anti-VEGF at monthly intervals and retreatment was performed in persistent or recurrent CNV. Multivariate regression analyses were performed to determine the prognostic factors for visual outcome.

RESULTS

The mean age was 57.3 years and the mean refractive error was -11.7 D. For all eyes, the mean logMAR best-corrected visual acuity improved from 0.86 (20/145) at baseline to 0.48 (20/60) at 2 years (P<0.001). The mean visual improvement for the bevacizumab and ranibizumab groups at 2 years was 2.8 and 5.1 lines, respectively (P=0.073). There was no significant difference in the proportion of eyes having visual gain of three or more lines or visual loss of three or more lines between the two groups. The mean number of injections was 3.8 for both bevacizumab and ranibizumab groups. Multivariate analyses showed that eyes with higher myopic refractive error were less likely to have visual gain after treatment (P=0.043), while size of CNV was negatively correlated with mean change in vision (P=0.046).

CONCLUSIONS

Intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy resulted in long-term visual improvement in myopic CNV. The treatment efficacy in terms of visual gain and number of retreatment appeared to be similar between bevacizumab and ranibizumab.