Abrupt visual loss during anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment for type 3 neovascularization

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor monotherapy or combined with verteporfin photodynamic therapy for retinal angiomatous proliferation: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Purpose: To assess functional and anatomical outcomes of intravitreal anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (anti-VEGF) monotherapy versus combined with verteporfin Photodynamic Therapy (PDT) for Retinal Angiomatous Proliferation (RAP). Methods: Studies reporting outcomes of intravitreal anti-VEGF monotherapy and/or in combination with verteporfin PDT in RAP eyes with a follow-up ≥ 12 months were searched. The primary outcome was the mean change in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 12 months. Mean change in central macular thickness (CMT) and mean number of injections were considered as secondary outcomes. The mean difference (MD) between pre- and post-treatment values was calculated along with 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI). Meta-regressions were performed to assess the influence of anti-VEGF number of injections on BCVA and CMT outcomes. Results: Thirty-four studies were included. A mean gain of 5.16 letters (95% CI = 3.30-7.01) and 10.38 letters (95% CI = 8.02-12.75) was shown in the anti-VEGF group and combined group, respectively (anti-VEGF group vs. combined group, p < 0.01). A mean CMT reduction of 132.45 µm (95% CI = from -154.99 to -109.90) and 213.93 µm (95% CI = from -280.04 to -147.83) was shown in the anti-VEGF group and combined group, respectively (anti-VEGF group vs. combined group, p < 0.02). A mean of 4.9 injections (95% CI = 4.2-5.6) and 2.8 injections (95% CI = 1.3-4.4) were administered over a 12-month period in the anti-VEGF group and combined group, respectively. Meta-regression analyses showed no influence of injection number on visual and CMT outcomes. High heterogeneity was found across studies for both functional and anatomical outcomes. Conclusion: A combined approach with anti-VEGF and PDT could provide better functional and anatomical outcomes in RAP eyes compared with anti-VEGF monotherapy.

Proportion and Reasons for Ineligibility to Re-register for Extended Health Insurance in Neovascular Age-related Macular Degeneration

Purpose: To evaluate the proportion and reasons for ineligibility to re-register for extended health insurance at 5 years in patients diagnosed with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and registered for extended health insurance. Methods: This retrospective study was performed in patients diagnosed with neovascular AMD and registered for extended health insurance with follow-up for at least 5 years. The criteria for re-registration for extended health insurance were determined along with the ineligibility for re-registration. Results: In total, 263 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 148 (56.3%) did not satisfy the criteria for re-registration. No active treatment was performed in 98 patients during the last 6 months of the study period (no recurrence, 51 patients; additional treatment was not considered beneficial due to retinal damage even without disciform scar formation, 44 patients). Macular disciform scar formation was noted in 50 patients (33.8%). Older age (p = 0.013), poor visual acuity (p = 0.004), and retinal angiomatous proliferation (p < 0.001) were associated with ineligibility for re-registration due to severe retinal damage. Conclusions: Among the patients who were initially registered for extended health insurance, 56.3% failed to satisfy the re-registration criteria. The primary reason was advanced retinal damage. The results of this study provide useful information for patient education and to establish long-term treatment strategies.

Fluid as a critical biomarker in neovascular age-related macular degeneration management: literature review and consensus recommendations

Current guidelines on the management of patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) lack clear recommendations on the interpretation of fluid as seen on optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging and the incorporation of this information into an ongoing disease treatment strategy. Our objective was to review current guidelines and scientific evidence on the role of fluid as a biomarker in the management of nAMD, and develop a clinically oriented, practical algorithm for diagnosis and management based on a consensus of expert European retinal specialists. PubMed was searched for articles published since 2006 relating to the role of fluid in nAMD. A total of 654 publications were screened for relevance and 66 publications were included for review. Of these, 14 were treatment guidelines, consensus statements and systematic reviews or meta-analyses, in which OCT was consistently recommended as an important tool in the initial diagnosis and ongoing management of nAMD. However, few guidelines distinguished between types of fluid when providing recommendations. A total of 52 publications reported primary evidence from clinical trials, studies, and chart reviews. Observations from these were sometimes inconsistent, but trends were observed with regard to features reported as being predictive of visual outcomes. Based on these findings, diagnostic recommendations and a treatment algorithm based on a treat-and-extend (T&E) regimen were developed. These provide guidance on the diagnosis of nAMD as well as a simple treatment pathway based on the T&E regimen, with treatment decisions made according to the observations of fluid as a critical biomarker for disease activity.

Long-Term Treatment Outcomes in Type 3 Neovascularization: Focus on the Difference in Outcomes between Geographic Atrophy and Fibrotic Scarring

Background: To evaluate the difference in the long-term treatment outcomes of type 3 neovascularization between eyes with geographic atrophy and those with fibrotic scars. Methods: This retrospective study included 195 eyes diagnosed with type 3 neovascularization and treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents. The included eyes were divided into three groups according to the fundus findings at the final visit: patients with fovea-involving geographic atrophy (GA group), patients with fovea-involving fibrotic scars (scar group), and patients with no fovea-involving geographic atrophy or fibrotic scars (non-GA/scar group). The best-corrected visual acuities (BCVA) of the three groups at the final visits were compared. Results: The mean follow-up period was 47.5 ± 20.7 months. The mean logMAR BCVA at the final visit was 1.18 ± 0.58 in the GA group (n = 58), 1.67 ± 0.58 in the scar group (n = 62), and 0.69 ± 0.64 in the non-GA/scar group (n = 75). The BCVA was significantly worse in the scar group than in the GA (p < 0.001) and the non-GA/scar groups (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Eyes with fibrotic scars showed the poorest visual outcomes in type 3 neovascularization among the studied groups. Preventing the development of fibrotic scars should be considered an important treatment goal.