Thirteen years of intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy: the promises and burdens of a paradigm shift told from the perspective of the largest retina service in Norway.

PURPOSE: To describe the first 13 years of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy from the perspective of a public ophthalmic department serving a local community of almost one million people. METHODS: Retrospective registry study. Data from Oslo University Hospital, Norway were collected from 2006 through 2018. Hospital episode statistics were searched for episodes of care encompassing intravitreal anti-VEGF procedures. Patient-specific ID numbers, diagnoses, and drug codes were registered. In general, bevacizumab was used as first-line treatment, with aflibercept reserved for resistant cases from 2013. RESULTS: The number of unique patients treated per year increased from 130 in 2006 to 3428 in 2018. In 2018, 2488 (73%) patients had also received treatment the previous year. The number of yearly injections increased from 228 in 2006 to 25 570 in 2018. In 2018 the diagnosis macular degeneration constituted 69% of injections, diabetic retinopathy constituted 15%, retinal vein occlusion constituted 13%, and other diagnoses constituted 3%. In the same year 49% of injections were with bevacizumab, 46% with aflibercept, 4% with ranibizumab, and 1% with dexamethasone implants. The bevacizumab to aflibercept ratio was almost 1:1 for macular degeneration and diabetic retinopathy; for retinal vein occlusion the ratio was 13:7. CONCLUSION: In 13 years there was an approximately 100-fold increase in the number of yearly intravitreal injections. A majority of patients received long-term treatment. Macular degeneration was the most common diagnosis. Using bevacizumab as first-line treatment, with aflibercept reserved for resistant cases from 2013, eventually resulted in a nearly 1:1 ratio in drug usage.

Cost-effectiveness of the triple procedure - phacovitrectomy with posterior capsulotomy compared to phacovitrectomy and sequential procedures.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the triple procedure (phacovitrectomy + posterior capsulotomy, PhacoPPVc) compared to the double- (phacovitrectomy, PhacoPPV) or single sequential procedures. METHODS: Prospective study on 31 eyes from 31 patients (mean age: 72.1 ± 9.1 years; 55% females) was performed with a preoperative decision to undergo only pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) (26%) or PhacoPPV (74%) and/or posterior capsulotomy based upon presence or absence of lens opacification or pseudophakia. Time during and between surgeries, surgical procedure codes, medical and transport costs, outcome and likelihood of complications after surgery were all included in the analysis. Societal perspectives and visual acuity were considered as measures of quality of adjusted life years (QALYs). RESULTS: About 23 eyes underwent triple procedure and eight eyes underwent vitrectomy only (mean surgery times: 35.9 and 24.0 min, respectively). Posterior capsulotomy took on average 30 s, while preparation and cataract procedure took 13.0 min. The patients travelled on average 80km (average cost: $280.12) to the surgery unit. The average reimbursement fee for the day procedures ranged between $174.17 (YAG capsulotomy; Diagnosis Related Group (DRG): 0.034), $1045.48 (Phaco + intraocular lens (IOL); DRG: 0.204) and $1701.32 (PPV; DRG: 0.332). The combined procedures excluded lens and laser reimbursements, while the calculated reimbursements for the double/triple procedures were $2713.08/$2901.45, respectively, without significant loss of QALYs. PhacoPPVc was found to be unequivocally cost-effective, while PhacoPPV remained cost saving compared to sequential procedures. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that the triple procedure has benefits to the patients, health institution and surgeon. For patients, it saves them travel and healing time; for health institution, it justifies the calculated higher costs and need for higher reimbursement for the double/triple procedures, which are cost saving.

Cultivation and characterization of pterygium as an ex vivo study model for disease and therapy.

PURPOSE: Development of ex vivo model to study pathogenesis, inflammation and treatment modalities for pterygium. METHODS: Pterygium obtained from surgery was cultivated (3 months). Gravitational attachment method using viscoelastic facilitated adherence of graft and outgrowing cells. Medium contained serum as the only growth supplement with no use of scaffolds. Surface profiling of the multi-layered cells for hematopoietic- and mesenchymal stem cell markers was performed. Examination of cells by immunohistochemistry using pluripotency, oxidative stress, stemness, migration and proliferation, epithelial and secretory markers was performed. The effect of anti-proliferative agent Mitomycin C upon secretion of pro-inflammatory cytokines IL-6 and IL-8 was assessed. RESULTS: Cells showed high expression of migration- (CXCR4), secretory- (MUC1, MUC4) and oxidative damage- (8-OHdG) markers, and low expression of hypoxia- (HIF-1α) and proliferation- (Ki-67) markers. Moderate and low expression of the pluripotency markers (Vimentin and ΔNp63) was present, respectively, while the putative markers of stemness (Sox2, Oct4, ABCG-2) and epithelial cell markers- (CK19, CK8-18) were weak. The surface marker profile of the outgrowing cells revealed high expression of the hematopoietic marker CD47, mesenchymal markers CD90 and CD73, minor or less positivity for the hematopoietic marker CD34, mesenchymal marker CD105, progenitor marker CD117 and attachment protein markers while low levels of IL-6 and IL-8 secretion ex vivo, were inhibited upon Mitomycin C treatment. CONCLUSION: Ex vivo tissue engineered pterygium consists of a mixture of cells of different lineage origin, suitable for use as a disease model for studying pathogenesis ex vivo, while opening possibilities for new treatment and prevention modalities.

[Optic neuritis--diagnosis, treatment and follow up]. / Optikusnevritt--diagnose, behandling og oppfølging.

A national group of neurologists and ophthalmologists have evaluated guidelines and recommendations for diagnosis, treatment and follow up of optic neuritis based on clinical experience and a review of relevant literature. Optic neuritis is a common, well characterised condition that appears as an isolated syndrome or as a manifestation of multiple sclerosis. Several other diseases must be considered for a differential diagnosis. Corticosteroid treatment of optic neuritis has been investigated in a number of trials, which show that corticosteroid treatment speeds up the recovery of vision without affecting the final visual outcome. The diagnostic procedure and the treatment options have changed over the last few years. Some aspects of investigation, treatment and follow up are still controversial.