Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant (Ozurdex) for Long-Term Macular Edema after Epiretinal Membrane Peeling Surgery

Use of a dexamethasone implant to treat macular edema following pars plana vitrectomy and removal of the primary epiretinal membrane

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of an intravitreal dexamethasone (DEX) implant for the treatment of macular edema (ME) following pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) and removal of the primary epiretinal membrane (ERM) and to assess the impact of the integrity of the ellipsoid zone (EZ) and disorganization of the retinal inner layer (DRIL) grade on visual and anatomical outcomes.

METHODS

Forty-two pseudophakic patients who developed ME following PPV and removal of the primary stage 2-3 ERM were included. Patients were divided into two groups when ME was diagnosed via spectral domain optic coherence tomography (SD-OCT). In the DEX group (n = 22), DEX was implanted for the treatment of ME. In the control group (n = 20), only observation was conducted, without any treatment. The best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and macular thickness (MT) of the two groups were compared at baseline and 1, 6, and 12 months after DEX implantation. The effects of OCT parameters such as EZ integrity and DRIL grade were also evaluated in terms of decreases in MT and increases in VA in the treatment of ME with DEX implantation. Intraocular pressure (IOP), number of DEX implantations and adverse effects were also recorded.

RESULTS

While a statistically significant increase in the mean BCVA was observed in the DEX group (p < 0.001 at months 1, 6, and 12, respectively), no such increase was detected in the control group (p = 0.169, p = 0.065, and p = 0.058 at months 1, 6 and 12, respectively) compared with the baseline. A statistically significant decrease in the mean MT was observed in the DEX group (p  < 0.001 at months 1, 6, and 12); however, no significant difference was observed in the control group (p  = 0.081, p  = 0.065, and p  = 0.054 at months 1, 6 and 12, respectively) compared with the baseline. Significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of the increase in BCVA (p  < 0.01) and decrease in MT (p  < 0.01) at all visits, with the outcomes being more favorable in the DEX group. A statistically significant relationship was found between the increase in VA and EZ integrity and DRIL grade in both groups. Ten patients (45.4%) received two injections of DEX during the follow-up. An increase in IOP was observed in five patients (22.7%) who were treated with topical antiglaucomatous drops. No significant side effects were observed.

CONCLUSION

DEX implantation was found to be effective and safe for the treatment of ME following PPV and primary ERM removal, although some eyes may require repeated injections to achieve visual and anatomical success. Additionally, a relationship was found between EZ integrity, DRIL grade and visual-anatomical outcomes.

Current management options for the treatment of refractory postoperative cystoid macular edema: A systematic review

Post-operative cystoid macular edema (PCME) is an important complication following intraocular surgery that often resolves spontaneously without treatment. In some cases, PCME may persist despite initial medical therapy, which can adversely impact visual outcomes. Various topical, intraocular and systemic treatments exist for the prevention and management of cystoid macular edema; however, there is no consensus on treatment of refractory cases in the postoperative setting. In accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, we systematically reviewed 68 articles describing management options and their outcomes for treatment-resistant cases of PCME. The most commonly reported treatments included steroid (39 studies) and biological-based (17 studies) therapies. We provide an overview of the treatment options for refractory PCME.

Changes in optical coherence tomography biomarkers in eyes with advanced idiopathic epiretinal membrane treated with dexamethasone implantation

PURPOSE

To investigate the effects of vitrectomy and intravitreal dexamethasone (DEX) implantation on retinal biomarkers in patients with advanced idiopathic epiretinal membrane (IERM) and to evaluate this treatment's anatomical and functional outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 41 patients with advanced IERM who underwent vitrectomy and were divided into a pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) group (20 eyes) and a dexamethasone (DEX) group (21 eyes) based on intravitreal DEX implantation. We collected data on best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), disorganization of the retinal inner layers (DRIL), subretinal fluid, intraretinal cystoid changes (IRC), integrity of the inner-outer segment layer, and intraocular pressure.

RESULTS

BCVA improved significantly in both groups; the DEX group had a higher visual acuity gain at 1 and 6 months (P = 0.002 and 0.023, respectively). Postoperative CMT gradually decreased in both groups, with the DEX group showing a greater decrease at 1 and 6 months (P = 0.009 and 0.033, respectively). Six months after surgery, the DRIL and IRC grades in the DEX group were significantly improved compared to those in the PPV group (P = 0.037 and 0.038, respectively). Multivariate regression analyses revealed that patients with intraoperative DEX implants were more likely to have a significant CMT reduction (≥ 100 μm) from baseline (odds ratio (OR), 9.44; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 1.58-56.56; P = 0.014) at 6 months and less likely to exhibit DRIL at 6 months postoperatively (OR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.01-0.68; P = 0.021).

CONCLUSION

Vitrectomy combined with intravitreal DEX implantation facilitates the recovery of postoperative visual acuity and improvement of anatomical outcomes in patients with advanced IERM, effectively reducing CMT and improving DRIL.

A Comparison of Ocular Complications after 0.7 mg Dexamethasone Implant versus 2 mg of Intravitreal Triamcinolone in Vitrectomized Eyes

OBJECTIVE

To compare the rates of complications in eyes that received a dexamethasone (DEX) implant (0.7 mg) or intravitreal triamcinolone (IVT) (2 mg) to treat postvitrectomy macular edema (ME).

DESIGN

Retrospective, comparative, case series.

SUBJECTS

A total of 148 eyes (147 patients); 75 eyes (75 patients) in the DEX group and 73 eyes (72 patients) in the IVT group.

METHODS

The medical records of patients who received an intravitreal DEX 0.7 mg (Ozurdex) or triamcinolone (2 mg) (Triesence) for postvitrectomy ME between July 2014 and December 2021 with a minimum follow-up of 3 months were reviewed. Ocular hypotony and ocular hypertension were defined as intraocular pressure of < 6 mmHg and > 24 mmHg, respectively.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The rates of complications.

RESULTS

The follow-up duration was 2.5 ± 1.6 years, with no significant difference between the groups (P = 0.398). The rate of transient ocular hypotony per eye and per injection was significantly higher in the DEX group (10 eyes [13%], 30 of 443 injections [7%]) compared with the IVT group (2 eyes [3%], 2 of 262 injections [0.8%]) (P = 0.039 and < 0.001, respectively). Mean visual acuity significantly decreased at the time of ocular hypotony (P = 0.031), but returned to preinjection level after resolution of the hypotony after a median of 12 days. The incidence of ocular hypertension was higher in the DEX group (23 eyes [31%]) than the IVT group (16 eyes [22%]), but this was not statistically significant (P = 0.307). Ocular hypertension was controlled with observation or topical medication. There were no between-group differences in the incidence of vitreous hemorrhage (DEX, 3 eyes [4%]; IVT, 1 eye [1%]; P = 0.632) or rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (DEX, 3 eyes [4%]; IVT, 0 eyes [0%]; P = 0.253). Four eyes (5%) experienced migration of the DEX implant into the anterior chamber. No eye developed endophthalmitis.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of ocular hypotony, which causes transient visual impairment, was significantly higher in vitrectomized eyes treated with DEX compared with eyes treated with IVT. Injections other than the inferotemporal quadrant or rotating injection sites may be recommended.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Autologous simple conjunctival epithelial transplantation for primary pterygium

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feasibility of a new method of conjunctival transplantation to achieve recovery of the normal conjunctival epithelium over the bare sclera after pterygium excision and prevent its recurrence.

METHODS

After excision of the primary pterygium, we performed simple conjunctival epithelial transplantation (SCET) in which we glued an amniotic membrane patch pre-loaded with tiny autologous conjunctival tissue fragments over the scleral defect. Slit-lamp evaluation was performed at 2 and 7-10 days, and then at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery, together with confocal microscopy at 3, 6, and 12 months.

RESULTS

Surgical excision and SCET for nasal primary pterygium were performed in 6 eyes (6 patients). No graft detachment occurred. An inflammatory granuloma was excised without sequelae in one patient 2 months after surgery. No signs of recurrence or sight-threatening complications were recorded at 12 months, and in vivo confocal microscopy showed progressive expansion of the conjunctival cell population and formation of a clear corneal-conjunctival transition.

CONCLUSIONS

SCET takes advantage of the ability of the amniotic membrane and conjunctival cells to renew. Outcomes after SCET are comparable to conventional conjunctival flap surgery and can be achieved in less surgical time and with less donor tissue to be removed.

A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing nepafenac, intravitreal triamcinolone and no adjuvant therapy for epiretinal membrane

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy of topical nepafenac 0.1% versus intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) at the conclusion of vitrectomy surgery versus no adjuvant therapy (NAT) in improving macular morphology post-operatively in patients undergoing vitrectomy for epiretinal membrane (ERM), as measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA).

METHODS

Design: Prospective randomized clinical trial Setting: Multi-centre 80 patients scheduled to undergo vitrectomy surgery for idiopathic ERM were randomized to receive either IVTA (4 mg/0.1 cc) at the end of surgery, topical nepafenac sodium 0.1% TID for 1 month post-operation or no adjuvant treatment (NAT). Optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging, best-corrected visual acuity and intraocular pressure (IOP) were measured before surgery, and 1 and 2 months post-operation.

RESULTS

Although all three groups showed reduction in macular thickness post-operation, the NAT group showed the most improvement, with a reduction of 136.18 ± 29.84 μm at two months. There was no statistically significant difference in macular thickness between the groups at each time point, p = 0.158. The NAT group also had the best recovery in BCVA with an improvement of 0.207 logMAR (10.35 letters) at two months post-operation. There was no statistically significant difference in BCVA between the groups, p = 0.606. There was statistically significant difference in the IOP between the three groups, p = 0.04 only at 1-month visit. The IVTA group had the highest rise in average IOP at both 1 and 2 months post-operation (2.72 and 1.58 mmHg, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our study data suggest there was no advantage in the use of topical nepafenac or IVTA for post-vitrectomy ERM surgery.

Guidelines for the Management of Center-Involving Diabetic Macular Edema: Treatment Options and Patient Monitorization

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is the main cause of visual impairment associated with diabetic retinopathy (DR) and macular laser, during approximately three decades, and was the single treatment option. More recently, intravitreous injections of anti-angiogenics and corticosteroids modified the treatment paradigm associated with significant vision improvements. Nevertheless, not all patients respond satisfactorily to anti-VEGF or corticosteroid injections, so an adequate treatment choice and a prompt switch in therapeutic class is recommended. Several algorithms and guidelines have been proposed for treating center involving DME to improve patients’ vision and quality of life. However, in Portugal, such guidelines are lacking. The present review aimed to provide guidelines for the treatment options and patient monitorization in the management of center-involving DME. We recommend anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) as first-line therapy after a clinical evaluation accompanied by a rigorous metabolic control. Depending on the response obtained after 3–6 monthly intravitreal injections we suggest switching outside the class in case of a non-responder, maintaining the anti-VEGF-therapy in responders to anti-angiogenics. The treatment regimen for Dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEXii) should be pro-re-nata with bi-monthly or quarterly monitoring visits (with a scheduled visit at 6–8 weeks after DEXii for intraocular pressure control). If a patient does not respond to DEXii, switch again to anti-VEGF therapy, combine therapies, or re-evaluate patients diagnose. There is a resilient need to understand the disease, its treatments, regimens available, and convenience for all involved to propose an adequate algorithm for the treatment of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and DME in an individualized regimen. Further understanding of the contributing factors to the development and progression of DR should bring new drug discoveries for more effective and better-tolerated treatments.

Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant for Postoperative Macular Oedema Secondary to Vitrectomy for Epiretinal Membrane and Retinal Detachment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of intravitreal dexamethasone implant (DEX) for the treatment of macular oedema secondary to vitrectomy for epiretinal membrane (ERM) and retinal detachment (RD) by conducting a systematic review with meta-analysis of published studies.

METHODS

Studies reporting clinical outcomes of DEX use for the treatment of macular oedema secondary to ERM and RD vitrectomy were searched on PubMed and Embase databases. The primary outcome was best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) change between baseline and post-DEX treatment, reported as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Mean central macular thickness (CMT) change was assessed as a secondary outcome. Postimplant adverse events, including intraocular pressure rise and cataract development, were reported as well.

RESULTS

Five uncontrolled studies, 1 nonrandomized controlled study, and 1 randomized controlled study were included, with a total of 5 cohorts and 3 cohorts in the ERM group and RD group, respectively. Considering the last available follow-up, a significant improvement in postimplant BCVA was found in the overall population, irrespective of the indication for vitrectomy (MD = -0.28, 95% CI = -0.37, -0.20; p < 0.001), but with significant heterogeneity. In either group, mean BCVA significantly improved following the implant (in the ERM group, MD = -0.31, 95% CI = -0.40, -0.22; in the RD group, MD = -0.22, 95% CI = -0.41, -0.03), with no difference between the two groups (p=0.41). However, there was significant heterogeneity in both groups. Considering the last available follow-up, a significant CMT reduction was found in the overall population, irrespective of the indication for vitrectomy (MD = -129.75, 95% CI = -157.49, -102.01; p < 0.001). In the ERM group, a significant CMT reduction was shown following DEX (MD = -133.41, 95% CI = -155.37, -111.45; p < 0.001), with no heterogeneity. In the RD group, mean CMT reduction was borderline significant (MD = -128.37, 95% CI = -253.57, -3.18; p=0.040), with significant heterogeneity. No difference in CMT improvement was found between the two groups (p=0.94).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis showed that DEX yielded a significant improvement in visual and anatomical outcomes, even if limited by significant heterogeneity. Dexamethasone implant represents an effective treatment for postoperative macular oedema secondary to ERM and RD vitrectomy.

Evaluation of intraoperative slow-release dexamethasone implant combined with idiopathic epiretinal membrane removal

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of intraoperative slow-release dexamethasone implant (DEX) combined with removal of idiopathic epiretinal membrane (ERM).

METHODS

In this observational retrospective study, data of 40 patients with phakic eyes affected by idiopathic ERM were analysed. All patients underwent cataract phacoemulsification, 25-gauge (G) pars plana vitrectomy (PPV), ERM removal with DEX implant ("DEX YES" group, #20) or without DEX implant ("DEX NO" group, #20). We collected data on best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) < 20/40 Snellen charts, central macular thickness (CMT) ≤ 400 μm (measured by SD-OCT) and integrity of sub-foveal ellipsoid/myoid zone. BCVA, CMT and intraocular pressure (IOP) were evaluated at baseline as well as 15, 30 and 90 days after surgery.

RESULTS

In the "DEX YES" group, statistically significant BCVA improvement was observed at 15, 30 and 90 days (p < 0.001), while in the "DEX NO" group, improvements were observed only at 30 and 90 days (p < 0.001). In both groups, CMT significantly decreased at each follow-up visit (p < 0.001), and no statistically significant increase of IOP was detected at each follow-up visit.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, DEX accelerated the improvement of BCVA at 15 days after surgery. However, no evidence of further anatomical (CMT) and functional (BCVA) DEX effectiveness combined with removal of idiopathic ERM by 25-G PPV at 30 and 90 days follow-up was observed.