Risk factors for repeated dexamethasone intravitreal implant therapy for macular edema due to treatment-naïve branch retinal vein occlusion

The Impact of Intraocular Treatment on Visual Acuity of Patients Diagnosed with Branch Retinal Vein Occlusions

Branch retinal vein occlusions are a significant cause of vision loss and present several ophthalmic and systemic risk factors, including age, hypertension, hyperlipidemia and glaucoma. Retinal vein occlusion is the second-most-common retinal vascular disease. This study evaluated the effects of Ozurdex in contrast to a combination therapy with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and cortisone in treatment-naive branch retinal vein occlusions-macular edema (BRVO-ME) cases, at 4-month and 6-month follow-ups. Thirty eyes were included in the study, which were divided into two groups. The first group consisted of 15 eyes, and each received 1 injection of dexamethasone intravitreal implant Ozurdex (DEX). The second group of 15 eyes received 3 intravitreal injections, the first and second with the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor aflibercept and the third one with 4 mg of triamcinolone acetonide (Vitreal S), spaced at one month. The best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) results suggested that the peak efficacy was at 4 months for both groups, with mean values of 0.5 LogMAR and 0.4 LogMAR. Regarding macular edema, there were no significant changes between the 4- and 6-month follow-up periods, with mean values of 361 μm and 390 μm. Six patients experienced transient raised intraocular pressure at one week after treatment. This study highlights the benefits to visual acuity of the combination of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor and cortisone, which represents a viable solution with similar results to Ozurdex therapy.

Characteristics of major and macular branch retinal vein occlusion

We compared the aqueous profiles, baseline characteristics, and clinical outcomes of 54 eyes with macular edema secondary to major branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) and macular BRVO. We also identified the characteristics of poor responders to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections. Aqueous inflammatory cytokine and VEGF concentrations were significantly higher in major BRVO. In optical coherence tomography, major BRVO had a higher proportion with subretinal fluid, disorganization of retinal inner layers, and ellipsoid zone disruption. Comparing the clinical outcomes, major BRVO required more intravitreal anti-VEGF injections and had a poorer visual prognosis in the first 12 months. A significantly higher proportion of patients with major BRVO required additional treatments after 6 months compared to macular BRVO. Patients who responded poorly to anti-VEGF had higher aqueous VEGF levels and central subfield thickness (CST) at baseline. In conclusion, major BRVO patients required more and longer treatments, and had worse visual prognoses. BRVO that responds poorly to anti-VEGF had greater CST and higher aqueous VEGF levels at baseline.