Effectiveness of Intravitreal Ranibizumab in Nonvitrectomized and Vitrectomized Eyes with Diabetic Macular Edema: A Two-Year Retrospective Analysis

Effectiveness of intravitreal ranibizumab for diabetic macular edema in vitrectomized versus non-vitrectomized eyes: a Meta-analysis

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) for diabetic macular edema (DME) in vitrectomized versus non-vitrectomized eyes.

METHODS

The PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane, EBSCO were comprehensively searched for studies comparing vitrectomized and non-vitrectomized eyes with DME. Clinical outcomes of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), the mean number of intravitreal injection and adverse events were extracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

Six studies involving 641 eyes were included. Final visual gain significantly improved and CMT significantly reduced in vitrectomized eyes at 6mo and 12mo visits (P<0.05). Although the mean reduction in CMT among non-vitrectomized eyes was significantly greater than in vitrectomized eyes at the 6mo [mean difference (MD)=53.57, 95% confidence interval (CI): 28.03 to 78.72, P<0.0001] and 12mo (MD=49.65, 95%CI: 19.58 to 79.72, P=0.01), no significant difference was detected in improvement in BCVA at either 6mo (MD=0.05, 95%CI: -0.02 to 0.13, P=0.14) or 12mo (MD=0.03, 95%CI: -0.04 to 0.09, P=0.43). Injection number of ranibizumab in non-vitrectomized eyes was significantly less than that in vitrectomized eyes during 6-month period (MD=0.60, 95%CI: 0.16 to 1.04, P=0.008), while there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups during 12mo of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Evidence from current study suggests that IVR was useful for both vitrectomized group and non-vitrectomized group with DME. Although less reduction in macular thickness is found in vitrectomized group, visual improvement between two groups is similar.

Recommendations for diabetic macular edema management by retina specialists and large language model-based artificial intelligence platforms

PURPOSE

To study the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in developing diabetic macular edema (DME) management recommendations by creating and comparing responses to clinicians in hypothetical AI-generated case scenarios. The study also examined whether its joint recommendations followed national DME management guidelines.

METHODS

The AI hypothetically generated 50 ocular case scenarios from 25 patients using keywords like age, gender, type, duration and control of diabetes, visual acuity, lens status, retinopathy stage, coexisting ocular and systemic co-morbidities, and DME-related retinal imaging findings. For DME and ocular co-morbidity management, we calculated inter-rater agreements (kappa analysis) separately for clinician responses, AI-platforms, and the "majority clinician response" (the maximum number of identical clinician responses) and "majority AI-platform" (the maximum number of identical AI responses). Treatment recommendations for various situations were compared to the Indian national guidelines.

RESULTS

For DME management, clinicians (ĸ=0.6), AI platforms (ĸ=0.58), and the 'majority clinician response' and 'majority AI response' (ĸ=0.69) had moderate to substantial inter-rate agreement. The study showed fair to substantial agreement for ocular co-morbidity management between clinicians (ĸ=0.8), AI platforms (ĸ=0.36), and the 'majority clinician response' and 'majority AI response' (ĸ=0.49). Many of the current study's recommendations and national clinical guidelines agreed and disagreed. When treating center-involving DME with very good visual acuity, lattice degeneration, renal disease, anaemia, and a recent history of cardiovascular disease, there were clear disagreements.

CONCLUSION

For the first time, this study recommends DME management using large language model-based generative AI. The study's findings could guide in revising the global DME management guidelines.

Diabetic macular edema treatment guidelines in India: All India Ophthalmological Society Diabetic Retinopathy Task Force and Vitreoretinal Society of India consensus statement

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a common cause of moderate visual impairment among people with diabetes. Due to the rising number of people with diabetes in India, the absolute numbers of people with DME are significant. There are several treatment options for DME, and the choice of treatment is based on the availability of retinal specialists and infrastructure for the delivery of treatment. A major challenge is the out-of-pocket expenditure incurred by patients as most treatment options are costly. Treatment also varies based on the associated ocular and systemic conditions. The All India Ophthalmology Society (AIOS) and the Vitreo-Retinal Society of India (VRSI) have developed this consensus statement of the AIOS DR task force and VRSI on practice points of DME management in India. The objective is to describe the preferred practice patterns for the management of DME considering the different presentations of DME in different clinical scenarios.