Early-scatter laser photocoagulation promotes the formation of collateral vessels in branch retinal vein occlusion

An artificial intelligence system for the whole process from diagnosis to treatment suggestion of ischemic retinal diseases

Ischemic retinal diseases (IRDs) are a series of common blinding diseases that depend on accurate fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA) image interpretation for diagnosis and treatment. An artificial intelligence system (Ai-Doctor) was developed to interpret FFA images. Ai-Doctor performed well in image phase identification (area under the curve [AUC], 0.991-0.999, range), diabetic retinopathy (DR) and branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) diagnosis (AUC, 0.979-0.992), and non-perfusion area segmentation (Dice similarity coefficient [DSC], 89.7%-90.1%) and quantification. The segmentation model was expanded to unencountered IRDs (central RVO and retinal vasculitis), with DSCs of 89.2% and 83.6%, respectively. A clinically applicable ischemia index (CAII) was proposed to evaluate ischemic degree; patients with CAII values exceeding 0.17 in BRVO and 0.08 in DR may be associated with increased possibility for laser therapy. Ai-Doctor is expected to achieve accurate FFA image interpretation for IRDs, potentially reducing the reliance on retinal specialists.

Comparison of the efficiency of anti-VEGF drugs intravitreal injections treatment with or without retinal laser photocoagulation for macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: To compare the efficiency of anti-VEGF drugs intravitreal injections(IVI) treatment with or without retinal laser photocoagulation(LPC) for macular edema(ME) secondary to retinal vein occlusion(RVO).

Methods: The randomized controlled trials and retrospective studies including anti-VEGF drug IVI combined with retinal LPC and single IVI in the treatment of macular edema secondary to RVO were collected in PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. We extracted the main outcome indicators including the best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness(CMT), the number of injections and the progress of retinal non-perfusion areas(NPAs) for systematic evaluation, to observe whether IVI + LPC could be more effective on the prognosis of RVO. We use Review Manager 5.4 statistical software to analyze the data

Results: 527 articles were initially retrieved. We included 20 studies, with a total of 1387 patients who were divided into the combination(IVI + LPC) treatment group and the single IVI group. All the patients completed the ocular examination including BCVA, slit-lamp test, fundus examination and Optical Coherence Tomography(OCT) test before and after each treatment. There was no statistical difference between the combination treatment group and single IVI group on BCVA(WMD = 0.12,95%CI = -3.54–3.78,p = 0.95),CMT(WMD = -4.40,95%CI = -21.33–12.53,p = 0.61) and NPAs(WMD = 0.01,95%CI = -0.28–0.30,p = 0.94).However, the number of IVI was decreased significantly in the combination treatment group in BRVO patients, compared to that in the single IVI group(WMD = -0.69,95%CI = -1.18∼-0.21,p = 0.005).

Conclusion: In the treatment of RVO patients with macular edema, the combination of IVI and retinal LPC neither improves BCVA nor reduces CMT significantly compared with the single IVI treatment. However, the combination treatment can decrease the number of intravitreal injections in patients with BRVO, while it is not observed in CRVO patients.