Early results of dexamethasone implant, ranibizumab, and triamcinolone in macular edema due to branch retinal vein occlusion. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2015;26:54-59. [PMID: 26109021 DOI: 10.5301/ejo.5000637]

Comparison of intravitreal injection of conbercept and triamcinolone acetonide for macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion

AIM

To compare the safety and efficacy of the intravitreal injection of conbercept (IVC) and triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) for macular edema (ME) secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO).

METHODS

A prospective, randomized clinical study. Patients with ME secondary to BRVO were randomly assigned to either IVC group or IVTA group at a ratio of 2:1 and a 12-month follow-up was performed. The efficacy outcome measures included the mean changes and differences in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and the central retinal thickness (CRT). The safety profiles and the mean retreatment intervals were also compared.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference of baseline between the two groups (IVC group, n=36; IVTA group, n=17). At 12mo, the BCVA letters improved by 27.31±18.36 in the IVC group, and 13.53±11.37 in the IVTA group (P=0.0004). CRT reduction was 253.33±163.69 and 150.24±134.32 µm, respectively (P=0.0034). The mean BCVA in the IVC group was superior to that of the IVTA group for months 6-12 (P<0.01). The mean CRT at 9 and 12mo were thinner in the IVC group compared to the IVTA group (P<0.01). The mean retreatment interval in the IVC group was longer than that in the IVTA group (97.40±36.27d vs 68.71±36.38d, P=0.0030). One eye in the IVC group and seven eyes in the IVTA group developed elevated intraocular pressure (IOP; P=0.0012). The proportion of eyes with cataract new-onset or progression were 19.44% in the IVC group and 64.71% in the IVTA group (P=0.0012).

CONCLUSION

IVC could maintain or improve BCVA and reduce CRT for a longer time and have longer retreatment interval than IVTA. In addition, patients treated with IVTA are more susceptible to IOP elevation and cataract progression.

Topical Triamcinolone Acetonide-Loaded Liposomes as Primary Therapy for Macular Edema Secondary to Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion: A Pilot Study

Purpose: To explore safety and therapeutic efficacy of a topical ophthalmic triamcinolone acetonide-loaded liposome formulation (TA-LF) as primary therapy in patients with macular edema (ME) secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO). Methods: Twelve eyes of 12 patients with ME secondary to BRVO were exposed to a topical instillation of 1 drop of TA-LF (TA 0.2%) 6 times a day for 12 weeks to evaluate safety and efficacy. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) intraocular pressure (IOP), slit lamp examination, and central foveal thickness (CFT) were analyzed at every visit. In addition, the morphology of TA-LF was analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). Results: Patients presented a significant improvement of BCVA and CFT without significant IOP modification (P = 0.94). Treated eyes showed BCVA improvement from 40 ± 12.05 to 64.83 ± 15.97 letters and CFT reduction from 682.91 ± 278.60 to 271.58 ± 57.66 μm after 12 weeks of TA-LF therapy (P < 0.001). No adverse events, including IOP rising, were registered. SEM analysis of liposomal formulations showed that liposome (LP) size depends on its concentration. As the concentration of TA increased, the average size of LPs and the number of larger particles increased as well. TEM study displayed that LP formulation efficiently solubilizes TA crystals in nanoparticles and encapsulates them. Conclusion: LPs can function as nanocarriers of TA and they could be used as topical ophthalmic primary therapy instead of intravitreal drugs in patients with ME secondary to BRVO.

Intravitreal corticosteroid implant vs intravitreal ranibizumab for the treatment of macular edema: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of corticosteroid implant and intravitreal ranibizumab for the treatment of macular edema (ME).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were comprehensively searched for studies comparing dexamethasone implant with ranibizumab in patients with ME. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfield thickness (CST), and adverse events were extracted from the final eligible studies. RevMan 5.3 software was used to analyze the data, and the modified Jadad assessment tool was used to access the quality of outcomes.

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in our analysis. The types of causes of ME include central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO), branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO), and diabetic retinopathy (DR). The ranibizumab treatment group had significantly better BCVA compared with the corticosteroid treatment group (standard mean difference [SMD] -0.80; 95% CI -1.08, -0.53; P<0.00001). The ranibizumab treatment group also had higher CST reduction compared with the corticosteroid treatment group, and there was a significant difference (weighted mean difference [WMD] 167.58; 95% CI 125.21-209.95; P<0.00001). There was no significant difference in serious adverse effects between the two groups (SMD 1.67; 95% CI 0.69, 4.05; P=0.26). However, the use of corticosteroid implant had a higher risk of intraocular pressure (IOP) (OR 6.88; 95% CI 4.53-10.44; P<0.00001) elevation and cataract (OR 3.98; 95% CI 1.89-8.37; P=0.0003) than ranibizumab treatment and fewer injections.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with ranibizumab, corticosteroid implant did not have greater improved BCVA, but corticosteroid implant had less CST reduction. The advantages of corticosteroids are fewer injections, while the advantages of ranibizumab include fewer side effects.

Aldo-Keto Reductases: Multifunctional Proteins as Therapeutic Targets in Diabetes and Inflammatory Disease

Aldose reductase (AR) is an NADPH-dependent aldo-keto reductase that has been shown to be involved in the pathogenesis of several blinding diseases such as uveitis, diabetic retinopathy (DR) and cataract. However, possible mechanisms linking the action of AR to these diseases are not well understood. As DR and cataract are among the leading causes of blindness in the world, there is an urgent need to explore therapeutic strategies to prevent or delay their onset. Studies with AR inhibitors and gene-targeted mice have demonstrated that the action of AR is also linked to cancer onset and progression. In this review we examine possible mechanisms that relate AR to molecular signaling cascades and thus explain why AR inhibition is an effective strategy against colon cancer as well as diseases of the eye such as uveitis, cataract, and retinopathy.

Intravitreal bevacizumab injections versus dexamethasone implant for treatment-naïve retinal vein occlusion related macular edema

Purpose

To compare the short-term effects of three monthly intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injections to single dexamethasone (DEX) implantation in treatment-naïve patients with cystoid macular edema (CME) secondary to branch (BRVO) and central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO).

Design

A retrospective single-center study.

Subjects

A total of 135 eyes of 135 patients with BRVO (n=83) and CRVO (n=52).

Methods

Changes in clinical parameters were recorded before treatment and at the first and third month after commencement of IVB (n=121) and DEX (n=14).

Main outcome measures

Central retinal thickness (CRT), intraocular pressure (IOP), and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA).

Results

The baseline parameters were comparable between IVB and DEX groups. After the first month, CRT decreased by 131.3±42.9 μm in IVB and by 266.9±48.3 μm in DEX (mean ± SEM; p=0.047). IOP change was –0.29±0.39 mmHg in IVB and +3.70±2.34 mmHg in DEX (p=0.005). IOP elevation to ≥25 mmHg and ≥5 mmHg from the baseline was observed in two of the DEX- and in none of the IVB-treated eyes (p=0.010). After the third month, no differences regarding CRT and IOP were observed between the treatment modalities. Moreover, BCVA gain was comparable between IVB (0.37±0.05 logarithm of minimum angle of resolution [logMAR] units) and DEX (0.33±0.30 logMAR units) groups.

Conclusion

DEX was associated with faster resolution of CME, but had greater probability for short-term IOP elevation when compared to IVB. After the third month, treatments were comparably effective. Anatomical outcomes and adverse drug reactions of IVB versus DEX should be considered case specifically in patients having CME secondary to BRVO/CRVO.

Real-life clinical data for dexamethasone and ranibizumab in the treatment of branch or central retinal vein occlusion over a period of six months

PURPOSE

To evaluate the therapeutic outcome for dexamethasone implant (DEX) or intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) injections over 6 months in patients with macular edema due to branch or central retinal vein occlusion (BRVO, CRVO), in a real-life setting.

METHODS

A total of 107 patients with BRVO or CRVO were included into this retrospective single-center observational study. Patients were treated with monotherapy consisting of DEX or three monthly IVR injections following a pro re nata regimen (PRN). Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central retinal thickness (CRT) and intraocular pressure (IOP) were compared between the two therapy groups after 1, 3 and 6 months.

RESULTS

BRVO patients treated with DEX achieved a statistically significant gain in BCVA measured in logMAR after 1 month (mean gain, 95% CI: 0.21, 0.08-0.34, p = 0.001), 3 months (0.16, 0.03-0.28, p = 0.012) and 6 months (0.19, 0.07-0.32, p = 0.002), whereas patients treated with IVR showed a statistically significant BCVA gain in month 3 (mean improvement, 95% CI: 0.13, 0.01-0.26, p = 0.039) and month 6 (0.16, 0.03-0.29, p = 0.018). BCVA in CRVO patients with DEX worsened slightly at month 6 (mean worsening, 95% CI: -0.08, -0.24 to 0.08, p = 0.305), while IVR treated-patients achieved a statistically significant BCVA gain at 3 months (mean improvement, 95% CI: 0.14, 0.02-0.25, p = 0.021). Both therapies were accompanied by statistically significant CRT reductions of 150 to 200 μm (median). Adverse events reported were predictable and limited.

CONCLUSIONS

In a clinical setting, comparable improvement in BCVA and CRT were observed after DEX and IVR injections for treatment of BRVO. CRVO patients showed greater benefit with IVR.

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.

Retinal vein occlusion and the use of a dexamethasone intravitreal implant (Ozurdex®) in its treatment

Purpose

To review published data pertaining to the clinical experience with a dexamethasone intravitreal implant (Ozurdex®) with a view to establishing a clinically based therapeutic regime.

Methods

A PubMed search using the MeSH terms “retinal vein occlusion” and either “pathophysiology” or “dexamethasone intravitreal implant” was undertaken for manuscripts published until August 2015. The analysis included studies involving minimally 15 patients under a prospective design or 30 under a retrospective design, a minimal follow up of 6 months, and at least 2 intravitreal Ozurdex® injections per eye.

Results

In the vast majority of eyes, satisfactory outcomes were achieved with retreatment intervals of between 3 and 5 months. Initial evidence indicates a similar efficacy compared to anti-VEGF therapies as a first-line treatment. Safety concerns associated with the long-term and repeated use of Ozurdex® are not borne out by clinical findings: its implantation is not associated with a sustained increase in intraocular pressure (IOP) over time or with the number of applications.

Conclusion

Compared with anti-VEGF therapies, the burden of retreatment is reduced. In patients with chronic macular edema not responsive to repetitive anti-VEGF therapies, the outcome after dexamethasone implant treatment is encouraging. However, these results are achieved at the expense of side effects typically associated with steroids: in up to 20 % of the Ozurdex®-treated patients, an elevation in IOP, which could be medically controlled in the majority of cases, and cataract formation or progression was observed.

Novel strategies for the treatment of diabetic macular edema

Macular edema such as diabetic macular edema (DME) and diabetic retinopathy are devastating back-of-the-eye retinal diseases leading to loss of vision. This area is receiving considerable medical attention. Posterior ocular diseases are challenging to treat due to complex ocular physiology and barrier properties. Major ocular barriers are static (corneal epithelium, corneal stroma, and blood-aqueous barrier) and dynamic barriers (blood-retinal barrier, conjunctival blood flow, lymph flow, and tear drainage). Moreover, metabolic barriers impede posterior ocular drug delivery and treatment. To overcome such barriers and treat back-of-the-eye diseases, several strategies have been recently developed which include vitreal drainage, laser photocoagulation and treatment with biologics and/or small molecule drugs. In this article, we have provided an overview of several emerging novel strategies including nanotechnology based drug delivery approach for posterior ocular drug delivery and treatment with an emphasis on DME.