Arteriovenous sheathotomy for persistent macular edema in branch retinal vein occlusion

New Developments in the Classification, Pathogenesis, Risk Factors, Natural History, and Treatment of Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion

For years, branch retinal vein occlusion is still a controversial disease in many aspects. An increasing amount of data is available regarding classification, pathogenesis, risk factors, natural history, and therapy of branch retinal vein occlusion. Some of the conclusions may even change our impression of branch retinal vein occlusion. It will be beneficial for our doctors to get a deeper understanding of this disease and improve the treatment skills. The aims of this review is to collect the information above and report new ideas especially from the past a few years.

Branch retinal vein occlusion: treatment modalities: an update of the literature

BACKGROUND

Retinal vein occlusion is the second most common retinal vascular disorder after diabetic retinopathy and is considered to be an important cause of visual loss. In this review, our purpose is to update the literature about the treatment alternatives for branch retinal vein occlusion.

METHODS

Eligible papers were identified by a comprehensive literature search of PubMed, using the terms "branch retinal vein occlusion," "therapy," "intervention," "treatment," "vitrectomy," "sheathotomy," "laser," "anti-VEGF," "pegaptanib," "bevacizumab," "ranibizumab," "triamcinolone," "dexamethasone," "corticosteroids," "non-steroids," "diclofenac," "hemodilution," "fibrinolysis," "tPA," and "BRVO." Additional papers were also selected from reference lists of papers identified by the electronic database search.

RESULTS

Treatment modalities were analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

There are several treatment modalities for branch retinal vein occlusion and specifically for its complications, such as macular edema, vitreous hemorrhage, retinal neovascularization, and retinal detachment, including anti-aggregative therapy and fibrinolysis, isovolemic hemodilution, vitrectomy with or without sheathotomy, peripheral scatter and macular grid retinal laser therapy, non-steroid agents, intravitreal steroids, and intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGFs).

Techniques, rationale, and outcomes of internal limiting membrane peeling

BACKGROUND

The internal limiting membrane represents the structural interface between the retina and the vitreous and has been postulated to serve several essential functions. Recently, internal limiting membrane peeling has been used in the treatment of a variety of retinal disorders. We review the history, techniques, rationale, and outcomes of internal limiting membrane peeling.

METHODS

A review of the literature.

RESULTS

Internal limiting membrane peeling has been used to successfully treat a variety of retinal disorders including macular hole, epiretinal membrane, diabetic macular edema, retinal vein occlusion, and others.

CONCLUSION

Internal limiting membrane peeling may serve as an important component in the armamentarium of retinal surgery.

Physiology of vitreous surgery

Vitreous surgery has various physiological and clinical consequences, both beneficial and harmful. Vitrectomy reduces the risk of retinal neovascularization, while increasing the risk of iris neovascularization, reduces macular edema and stimulates cataract formation. These clinical consequences may be understood with the help of classical laws of physics and physiology. The laws of Fick, Stokes-Einstein and Hagen-Poiseuille state that molecular transport by diffusion or convection is inversely related to the viscosity of the medium. When the vitreous gel is replaced with less viscous saline, the transport of all molecules, including oxygen and cytokines, is facilitated. Oxygen transport to ischemic retinal areas is improved, as is clearance of VEGF and other cytokines from these areas, thus reducing edema and neovascularization. At the same time, oxygen is transported faster down a concentration gradient from the anterior to the posterior segment, while VEGF moves in the opposite direction, making the anterior segment less oxygenated and with more VEGF, stimulating iris neovascularization. Silicone oil is the exception that proves the rule: it is more viscous than vitreous humour, re-establishes the transport barrier to oxygen and VEGF, and reduces the risk for iris neovascularization in the vitrectomized-lentectomized eye. Modern vitreous surgery involves a variety of treatment options in addition to vitrectomy itself, such as photocoagulation, anti-VEGF drugs, intravitreal steroids and release of vitreoretinal traction. A full understanding of these treatment modalities allows sensible combination of treatment options. Retinal photocoagulation has repeatedly been shown to improve retinal oxygenation, as does vitrectomy. Oxygen naturally reduces VEGF production and improves retinal hemodynamics. The VEGF-lowering effect of photocoagulation and vitrectomy can be augmented with anti-VEGF drugs and the permeability effect of VEGF reduced with corticosteroids. Starling's law explains vasogenic edema, which is controlled by osmotic and hydrostatic gradients between vessel and tissue. It explains the effect of VEGF-induced vascular permeability changes on plasma protein leakage and the osmotic gradient between vessel and tissue. At the same time, it takes into account hemodynamic changes that affect the hydrostatic gradient. This includes the influence of arterial blood pressure, and the effect oxygen (laser treatment) has in constricting retinal arterioles, increasing their resistance, and thus reducing the hydrostatic pressure in the microcirculation. Reduced capillary hydrostatic pressure and increased osmotic gradient reduce water fluxes from vessel to tissue and reduce edema. Finally, Newton's third law explains that vitreoretinal traction decreases hydrostatic tissue pressure in the retina, increases the pressure gradient between vessel and tissue, and stimulates water fluxes from vessel into tissue, leading to edema.

Branch retinal vein occlusion: pathogenesis, visual prognosis, and treatment modalities

In branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO), abnormal arteriovenous crossing with vein compression, degenerative changes of the vessel wall and abnormal hematological factors constitute the primary mechanism of vessel occlusion. In general, BRVO has a good prognosis: 50-60% of eyes are reported to have a final visual acuity (VA) of 20/40 or better even without treatment. One important prognostic factor for final VA appears to be the initial VA. Grid laser photocoagulation is an established treatment for macular edema in a particular group of patients with BRVO, while promising results for this condition are shown by intravitreal application of steroids or new vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors. Vitrectomy with or without arteriovenous sheathotomy combined with removal of the internal limiting membrane may improve vision in eyes with macular edema which are unresponsive to or ineligible for laser treatment.

Intravitreous bevacizumab in the treatment of macular edema from branch retinal vein occlusion and hemisphere retinal vein occlusion (an AOS thesis)

PURPOSE

To compare intravitreous bevacizumab to other current treatments of branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) and hemisphere retinal vein occlusion (HRVO) with consideration to visual outcome, cost, convenience, and risk of treatment.

METHODS

This is a retrospective chart review from a large referral retina practice. The data comprise 56 patients with BRVO and HRVO treated by intravitreous bevacizumab, with and without intravitreous triamcinolone acetonide. Initial visual acuities at the time of first bevacizumab injection, best acuities through the follow-up time, final acuity at last visit before review, initial macular thickness, and final macular thickness were measured. Changes in vision and thickness were calculated, as were the percentage of eyes improving, stabilizing, and worsening.

RESULTS

The data were compared to composite data derived from several current treatments of BRVO. The subgroup of 39 eyes that received only bevacizumab without triamcinolone acetonide had the most improvement in vision. The median change in visual acuity was 1.5 lines (P = .012) over a mean follow-up of 8.8 months. Twenty-three eyes (59%) improved visually, with 20 eyes (51%) improving 2 or more lines. These results are similar to those for eyes that received argon grid laser and chorioretinal anastomosis, but are worse than in eyes that received arteriovenous adventitial sheathotomy, macular decompression surgery, and intravitreous triamcinolone acetonide.

CONCLUSIONS

Visual benefit from intravitreous bevacizumab compares well against laser treatments for BRVO and HRVO but not as well opposed to surgical techniques and intravitreous triamcinolone acetonide. Intravitreous bevacizumab injection has a risk, cost, and convenience profile that is favorable.