Intravitreal Aflibercept injection with Panretinal photocoagulation versus early Vitrectomy for diabetic vitreous hemorrhage: randomized clinical trial

Early versus Late Pars Plana Vitrectomy in Vitreous Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review

Background: Vitreous hemorrhage (VH) is a common vitreoretinal condition causing impairment of vision due to various etiologies. No consensus exists on the best timing for performing pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) in fundus-obscuring VH. Materials and Methods: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) standards, we conducted a systematic review of the timing of PPV in VH. We assessed the strength of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach for all the included publications, in accordance with the 2011 Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (OCEBM) recommendations. Results: A total of 1731 articles were identified. Following the removal of duplicates and screening of abstracts, 1203 articles remained. Subsequently, a comprehensive full-text review of 30 articles was conducted. Ultimately, 18 articles met the predefined inclusion criteria. Conclusions: Despite the small number of studies on the timing of treatment for VH, the advantage of early over late PPV seems to be a reasonable approach in selected cases, and it might be considered modern standard care.

Determining the Superiority of Vitrectomy vs Aflibercept for Treating Dense Diabetic Vitreous Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

This review aimed to systematically compare the efficacy and safety of intravitreal aflibercept (IVA) and vitrectomy for treating severe vitreous hemorrhage (VH) secondary to proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR). The review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A search strategy, including the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and US National Library of Medicine databases, was developed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared vitrectomy and IVA for managing VH due to PDR (participant age ≥ 18 years). The primary outcome measure was the difference in the mean visual acuity between the two treatment groups at 1, 6, and 24 months. Outcome measures included clearance of VH (in weeks), the incidence of recurrent VH, and the rate of complications. The studies were evaluated using the Cochrane Bias (ROB) tool. We identified 774 articles; six articles met the inclusion criteria, and two were ultimately included (n = 239 eyes). With or without PRP, IVA injections and vitrectomy were performed in 117 and 122 eyes, respectively. The mean BCVA at one month was significantly better in the vitrectomy group (MD=0.22, CI:0.10-0.34, p=0.0003), but no difference was found at six months (MD=0.04, CI: -0.04-0.12, p=0.356). The incidence of recurrent VH was significantly higher in the IVA group (OR=5.05, CI:2.71-9.42, p<0.0001). The probability of recurrent VH was five times greater in the IVA group than that in the vitrectomy group. There were no significant differences in the overall proportions of intra- or postoperative complications (OR=0.64, CI: 0.09-4.85, p=0.669). None of the studies had a low ROB in any of the seven domains. We conclude that IVA can be considered a viable treatment modality for diabetic VH in patients with a good follow-up. Vitrectomy initially provides better visual effect, faster VH recovery, and lower VH recurrence than IVA injections.

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factors in combination with vitrectomy for complications of proliferative diabetic retinopathy

BACKGROUND

Vitrectomy is an established treatment for the complications of proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR). However, a number of complications can occur during and after vitrectomy for PDR. These include bleeding and the creation of retinal holes during surgery, and bleeding, retinal detachment and scar tissue on the retina after surgery. These complications can limit vision, require further surgery and delay recovery. The use of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents injected into the eye before surgery has been proposed to reduce the occurrence of these complications. Anti-VEGF agents can reduce the amount and vascularity of abnormal new vessels associated with PDR, facilitating their dissection during surgery, reducing intra- and postoperative bleeding, and potentially improving outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of perioperative anti-VEGF use on the outcomes of vitrectomy for the treatment of complications for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register; 2022, Issue 6); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; the ISRCTN registry; ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP. The date of the search was 22 June 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that looked at the use of anti-VEGFs and the incidence of complications in people undergoing vitrectomy for PDR.   DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed and extracted the data. We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The critical outcomes of the review were the mean difference in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) between study arms at six (± three) months after the primary vitrectomy, the incidence of early postoperative vitreous cavity haemorrhage (POVCH, within four weeks postoperatively), the incidence of late POVCH (occurring more than four weeks postoperatively), the incidence of revision surgery for POVCH within six months, the incidence of revision surgery for recurrent traction/macular pucker of any type and/or rhegmatogenous retinal detachment within six months and vision-related quality of life (VRQOL) measures. Important outcomes included the proportion of people with a visual acuity of counting fingers (1.8 logMAR or worse), the number of operative retinal breaks reported and the frequency of silicone oil tamponade required at time of surgery.

MAIN RESULTS

The current review includes 28 RCTs that looked at the pre- or intraoperative use of intravitreal anti-VEGFs to improve the outcomes of pars plana vitrectomy for complications of PDR. The studies were conducted in a variety of countries (11 from China, three from Iran, two from Italy, two from Mexico and the remaining studies from South Korea, the UK, Egypt, Brazil, Japan, Canada, the USA, Indonesia and Pakistan). The inclusion criteria for entry into the studies were the well-recognised complications of proliferative retinopathy: non-clearing vitreous haemorrhage, tractional retinal detachment involving the macula or combined tractional rhegmatogenous detachment. The included studies randomised a total of 1914 eyes.  We identified methodological issues in all of the included studies. Risk of bias was highest for masking of participants and investigators, and a number of studies were unclear when describing randomisation methods and sequence allocation. Participants receiving intravitreal anti-VEGF in addition to pars plana vitrectomy achieved better BCVA at six months compared to people undergoing vitrectomy alone (mean difference (MD) -0.25 logMAR, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.39 to -0.11; 13 studies, 699 eyes; low-certainty evidence). Pre- or intraoperative anti-VEGF reduced the incidence of early POVCH (12% versus 31%, risk ratio (RR) 0.44, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.58; 14 studies, 1038 eyes; moderate-certainty evidence). Perioperative anti-VEGF use was also associated with a reduction in the incidence of late POVCH (10% versus 23%, RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.74; 11 studies, 579 eyes; high-certainty evidence). The need for revision surgery for POVCH occurred less frequently in the anti-VEGF group compared with control, but the confidence intervals were wide and compatible with no effect (4% versus 13%, RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.28; 4 studies 207 eyes; moderate-certainty evidence). Similar imprecisely measured effects were seen for revision surgery for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (5% versus 11%, RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.66; 4 studies, 145 eyes; low-certainty evidence).  Anti-VEGFs reduce the incidence of intraoperative retinal breaks (12% versus 31%, RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.59; 12 studies, 915 eyes; high-certainty evidence) and the need for silicone oil (19% versus 41%, RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.80; 10 studies, 591 eyes; very low-certainty evidence). No data were available on quality of life outcomes or the proportion of participants with visual acuity of counting fingers or worse.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The perioperative use of anti-VEGF reduces the risk of late POVCH, probably results in lower early POVCH risk and may improve visual outcomes. It also reduces the incidence of intraoperative retinal breaks. The evidence is very uncertain about its effect on the need for silicone oil tamponade. The reported complications from its use appear to be low. Agreement on variables included and outcome standardisation is required in trials studying vitrectomy for PDR.

Update on the Management of Diabetic Retinopathy: Anti-VEGF Agents for the Prevention of Complications and Progression of Nonproliferative and Proliferative Retinopathy

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a microvascular disease caused by poorly controlled blood glucose, and it is a leading cause of vision loss in people with diabetes. In this review we discuss the current management of DR with particular focus on the use of intraocular anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents. Intraocular anti-VEGF agents were first studied in the 1990s, and now several of these agents are either FDA approved or used off-label as first-line treatments for DR. Recent evidence shows that anti-VEGF agents can halt the progression of markers of DR severity, reduce the risk of DR worsening, and reduce the onset of new macular edema. These significant benefits have been demonstrated in patients with proliferative DR and the milder nonproliferative DR (NPDR). A wealth of evidence from recent trials and meta-analyses has detailed the intraoperative and postoperative benefits of adjunctive anti-VEGF therapy prior to pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for proliferative DR with vitreous hemorrhage. In this review, we also discuss literature comparing various anti-VEGF injection regimens including monthly, quarterly, as-needed, and treat and extend protocols. Combination protocols with panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) or PPV are also discussed. Current evidence suggests that anti-VEGF therapies are effective therapy for NPDR and PDR and may also provide significant benefits when used adjunctively with other DR treatment modalities such as PRP or PPV.

Ranibizumab for the treatment of diabetic retinopathy

Introduction: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is the most common microvascular complication of diabetes mellitus and the leading cause of blindness in young adults. Prior to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents, the treatment of DR was based on control of systemic factors and laser photocoagulation. Over the past decade, the use of anti-VEGF agents has revolutionized the treatment of DR, including diabetic macular edema (DME).Areas covered: Ranibizumab has been proven to be effective for the treatment of DME in large clinical trials, while patients in these studies have been assessed in terms of DR severity change. In this review, evidence from randomized trials regarding the use of ranibizumab for DR treatment is presented.Expert opinion: A comprehensive presentation of randomized clinical trials evaluating ranibizumab for DR indicates that it is effective and safe, offering improvement of DR severity in both non-proliferative and proliferative forms. However, there is no general consensus regarding the exact treatment regimen in patients with DR, while the effect of ranibizumab on the progression of retinal ischemia remains unclear.