Exploring the Associated Genetic Causes of Diabetic Retinopathy as a Model of Inflammation in Retinal Diseases.

To investigate potential biomarkers and biological processes associated with diabetic retinopathy (DR) using transcriptomic and proteomic data. The OmicsPred PheWAS application was interrogated to identify genes and proteins associated with DR and diabetes mellitus (DM) at a false discovery rate (FDR)-adjusted p-value of <0.05 and also <0.005. Gene Ontology PANTHER analysis and STRING database analysis were conducted to explore the biological processes and protein interactions related to the identified biomarkers. The interrogation identified 49 genes and 22 proteins associated with DR and/or DM; these were divided into those uniquely associated with diabetic retinopathy, uniquely associated with diabetes mellitus, and the ones seen in both conditions. The Gene Ontology PANTHER and STRING database analyses highlighted associations of several genes and proteins associated with diabetic retinopathy with adaptive immune response, valyl-TRNA aminoacylation, complement activation, and immune system processes. Our analyses highlight potential transcriptomic and proteomic biomarkers for DR and emphasize the association of known aspects of immune response, the complement system, advanced glycosylation end-product formation, and specific receptor and mitochondrial function with DR pathophysiology. These findings may suggest pathways for future research into novel diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for DR.

Reliability and accuracy of artificial intelligence ChatGPT in providing information on ophthalmic diseases and management to patients.

PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of ophthalmic information provided by an artificial intelligence chatbot (ChatGPT). METHODS: Five diseases from 8 subspecialties of Ophthalmology were assessed by ChatGPT version 3.5. Three questions were asked to ChatGPT for each disease: what is x?; how is x diagnosed?; how is x treated? (x = name of the disease). Responses were graded by comparing them to the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) guidelines for patients, with scores ranging from -3 (unvalidated and potentially harmful to a patient's health or well-being if they pursue such a suggestion) to 2 (correct and complete). MAIN OUTCOMES: Accuracy of responses from ChatGPT in response to prompts related to ophthalmic health information in the form of scores on a scale from -3 to 2. RESULTS: Of the 120 questions, 93 (77.5%) scored ≥ 1. 27. (22.5%) scored ≤ -1; among these, 9 (7.5%) obtained a score of -3. The overall median score amongst all subspecialties was 2 for the question "What is x", 1.5 for "How is x diagnosed", and 1 for "How is x treated", though this did not achieve significance by Kruskal-Wallis testing. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the positive scores, ChatGPT on its own still provides incomplete, incorrect, and potentially harmful information about common ophthalmic conditions, defined as the recommendation of invasive procedures or other interventions with potential for adverse sequelae which are not supported by the AAO for the disease in question. ChatGPT may be a valuable adjunct to patient education, but currently, it is not sufficient without concomitant human medical supervision.

Disparities in Retinal Vein Occlusion Presentation and Initiation of Anti-VEGF Therapy: An Academy IRIS® Registry Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Investigate disparities in retinal vein occlusion (RVO) presentation and initiation of anti-VEGF treatment. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SUBJECTS: Patients in the American Academy of Ophthalmology IRIS® (Intelligent Research in Sight) Registry database (2015-2021) with branch or central RVO and macular edema (ME). METHODS: The association of demographic characteristics and presenting visual acuity (VA) with anti-VEGF treatment initiation were quantified using multivariable logistic regression. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Treatment with ≥ 1 anti-VEGF injection within 12 months after RVO diagnosis. RESULTS: A total of 304 558 eligible patients with RVO and ME were identified. Age at presentation varied by race, ethnicity, sex, and RVO type (all P values < 0.001). Within the first year after RVO presentation, 192 602 (63.2%) patients received ≥ 1 anti-VEGF injection. In a multivariable regression model adjusting for relevant covariates, female (vs. male) patients had lower odds of receiving injections (odds ratio [OR], 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93-0.96; P < 0.0001) as did Black/African American (vs. White) patients (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.88-0.92; P < 0.0001) and Asian (vs. White) patients (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91-0.99; P = 0.02), whereas older patients (vs. patients aged < 51 years) had higher odds (61-70 years: OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.16-1.24; 71-80 years: OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.16-1.24; > 80 years: OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.11-1.18; all P values < 0.0001). Hispanic (vs. non-Hispanic) patients had a small increased odds of treatment initiation (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04-1.11; P < 0.0001). Results were similar in the subset of 226 143 patients with VA data. In this subset, patients with presenting VA < 20/40 to 20/200 were most frequently treated in the first year after diagnosis (∼ 70%) and patients with light perception/no light perception (LP-NLP) vision or VA of 20/20 or better were treated least frequently (36.9% and 41.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In this large national clinical registry, 37% of RVO patients with ME had no anti-VEGF treatment documented in the first year after diagnosis. Black/African American, Asian, and female patients and patients with VA of LP-NLP were least likely to receive treatment. Awareness of this undertreatment and these disparities highlight the need for initiatives to ensure all RVO patients receive timely anti-VEGF injections for optimized visual outcomes. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Surgical Management of Full-Thickness Macular Holes in Macular Telangiectasia Type 2: A Global Multicenter Study.

PURPOSE: To report on macular hole repair in macular telangiectasia type 2 (MacTel2). DESIGN: Global, multicenter, retrospective case series. PARTICIPANTS: Patients undergoing surgery for MacTel2-associated full-thickness macular hole (MTMH). METHODS: Standardized data collection sheet distributed to all surgeons. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Anatomic closure and visual outcomes of MTMH. RESULTS: Sixty-three surgeries in 47 patients with MTMH were included from 30 surgeons. Mean age was 68.1 years, with 62% female, 72% White, 21% East or South Asian, 2% African American, and 2% Hispanic or Latino. Procedures included 34 internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling alone, 22 ILM flaps, 5 autologous retinal transplantations (ARTs), 1 retinotomy, and 1 subretinal bleb. For ILM peeling, preoperative visual acuity (VA) was 0.667 ± 0.423 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR). Minimum hole diameter (MHD) was 305.5 ± 159.4 µm (range, 34-573 µm). Sixteen of 34 ILM peels (47%) resulted in MTMH closure. At postoperative month 6, VA was stable at 0.602 ± 0.516 logMAR (P = 0.65). VA improved by at least 2 lines in 43% and at least 4 lines in 24%. For ILM flaps, preoperative VA was 0.878 ± 0.552 logMAR. MHD was 440.8 ± 175.5 µm (range, 97-697 µm), which was significantly larger than for ILM peels (P < 0.01). Twenty of 22 ILM flaps (90%) resulted in MTMH closure, which was significantly higher than for ILM peels (P < 0.01). At postoperative month 6, VA improved to 0.555 ± 0.405 logMAR (P < 0.05). VA improved by at least 2 lines in 56% and at least 4 lines in 28%. For ARTs, preoperative VA was 1.460 ± 0.391 logMAR. MHD was 390.2 ± 203.7 µm (range, 132-687 µm). All 5 ARTs (100%) resulted in MTMH closure. At postoperative month 6, VA was stable at 1.000 ± 0.246 logMAR (P = 0.08). Visual acuity improved at least 2 lines in 25%. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical closure of macular holes improved VA in 57% of MTMHs. Internal limiting membrane flaps achieved better anatomic and functional outcomes than ILM peeling alone. Autologous retinal transplantation may be an option for refractory MTMHs. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Evaluating Visual Acuity in the American Academy of Ophthalmology IRIS® Registry.

Objective: To describe visual acuity data representation in the American Academy of Ophthalmology Intelligent Research in Sight (IRIS) Registry and present a data-cleaning strategy. Design: Reliability and validity study. Participants: Patients with visual acuity records from 2018 in the IRIS Registry. Methods: Visual acuity measurements and metadata were identified and characterized from 2018 IRIS Registry records. Metadata, including laterality, assessment method (distance, near, and unspecified), correction (corrected, uncorrected, and unspecified), and flags for refraction or pinhole assessment were compared between Rome (frozen April 20, 2020) and Chicago (frozen December 24, 2021) versions. We developed a data-cleaning strategy to infer patients' corrected distance visual acuity in their better-seeing eye. Main Outcome Measures: Visual acuity data characteristics in the IRIS Registry. Results: The IRIS Registry Chicago data set contains 168 920 049 visual acuity records among 23 001 531 unique patients and 49 968 974 unique patient visit dates in 2018. Visual acuity records were associated with refraction in 5.3% of cases, and with pinhole in 11.0%. Mean (standard deviation) of all measurements was 0.26 (0.41) logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), with a range of - 0.3 to 4.0 A plurality of visual acuity records were labeled corrected (corrected visual acuity [CVA], 39.1%), followed by unspecified (37.6%) and uncorrected (uncorrected visual acuity [UCVA], 23.4%). Corrected visual acuity measurements were paradoxically worse than same day UCVA 15% of the time. In aggregate, mean and median values were similar for CVA and unspecified visual acuity. Most visual acuity measurements were at distance (59.8%, vs. 32.1% unspecified and 8.2% near). Rome contained more duplicate visual acuity records than Chicago (10.8% vs. 1.4%). Near visual acuity was classified with Jaeger notation and (in Chicago only) also assigned logMAR values by Verana Health. LogMAR values for hand motion and light perception visual acuity were lower in Chicago than in Rome. The impact of data entry errors or outliers on analyses may be reduced by filtering and averaging visual acuity per eye over time. Conclusions: The IRIS Registry includes similar visual acuity metadata in Rome and Chicago. Although fewer duplicate records were found in Chicago, both versions include duplicate and atypical measurements (i.e., CVA worse than UCVA on the same day). Analyses may benefit from using algorithms to filter outliers and average visual acuity measurements over time. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

United States Population Disparities in Ophthalmic Care: Blindness and Visual Impairment in the IRIS® Registry (Intelligent Research in Sight).

PURPOSE: To evaluate associations of patient characteristics with United States eye care use and likelihood of blindness. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (19 546 016) with 2018 visual acuity (VA) records in the American Academy of Ophthalmology's IRIS® Registry (Intelligent Research in Sight). METHODS: Legal blindness (20/200 or worse) and visual impairment (VI; worse than 20/40) were identified from corrected distance acuity in the better-seeing eye and stratified by patient characteristics. Multivariable logistic regressions evaluated associations with blindness and VI. Blindness was mapped by state and compared with population characteristics. Eye care use was analyzed by comparing population demographics with United States Census estimates and proportional demographic representation among blind patients versus a nationally representative US population sample (National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey [NHANES]). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence and odds ratios for VI and blindness; proportional representation in the IRIS® Registry, Census, and NHANES by patient demographics. RESULTS: Visual impairment was present in 6.98% (n = 1 364 935) and blindness in 0.98% (n = 190 817) of IRIS patients. Adjusted odds of blindness were highest among patients ≥ 85 years old (odds ratio [OR], 11.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 10.33-13.59 vs. those 0-17 years old). Blindness also was associated positively with rural location and Medicaid, Medicare, or no insurance vs. commercial insurance. Hispanic (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.46-1.74) and Black (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.63-1.84) patients showed a higher odds of blindness versus White non-Hispanic patients. Proportional representation in IRIS Registry relative to the Census was higher for White than Hispanic (2- to 4-fold) or Black (11%-85%) patients (P < 0.001). Blindness overall was less prevalent in NHANES than IRIS Registry; however, prevalence in adults aged 60+ was lowest among Black participants in the NHANES (0.54%) and second highest among comparable Black adults in IRIS (1.57%). CONCLUSIONS: Legal blindness from low VA was present in 0.98% of IRIS patients and associated with rural location, public or no insurance, and older age. Compared with US Census estimates, minorities may be underrepresented among ophthalmology patients, and compared with NHANES population estimates, Black individuals may be overrepresented among blind IRIS Registry patients. These findings provide a snapshot of US ophthalmic care and highlight the need for initiatives to address disparities in use and blindness. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Incidence and Risk Factors for Retinal Detachment and Retinal Tear after Cataract Surgery: IRIS® Registry (Intelligent Research in Sight) Analysis.

Objective: To report the incidence of and evaluate demographic, ocular comorbidities, and intraoperative factors for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) and retinal tear (RT) after cataract surgery in the American Academy of Ophthalmology IRIS® Registry (Intelligent Research in Sight). Design: Retrospective cohort study. Participants: Patients aged ≥ 40 years who underwent cataract surgery between 2014 and 2017. Methods: Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate demographic, comorbidity, and intraoperative factors associated with RRD and RT after cataract surgery. Main Outcome Measures: Incidence and risk factors for RRD or RT within 1 year of cataract surgery. Results: Of the 3 177 195 eyes of 1 983 712 patients included, 6690 (0.21%) developed RRD and 5489 (0.17%) developed RT without RRD within 1 year after cataract surgery. Multivariable logistic regression odds ratios (ORs) showed increased risk of RRD and RT, respectively, among men (OR 3.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.99-3.32; P < 0.001 and 1.79; 95% CI, 1.70-1.89; P < 0.001), and younger ages compared with patients aged > 70, peaking at age 40 to 50 for RRD (8.61; 95% CI, 7.74-9.58; P < 0.001) and age 50 to 60 for RT (2.74; 95% CI, 2.52-2.98; P < 0.001). Increased odds of RRD were observed for procedure eyes with lattice degeneration (LD) (10.53; 95% CI, 9.82-11.28; P < 0.001), hypermature cataract (1.61; 95% CI, 1.06-2.45; P = 0.03), complex cataract surgery (1.52; 95% CI, 1.4-1.66; P < 0.001), posterior vitreous detachment (PVD) (1.24; 95% CI, 1.15-1.34; P < 0.001), and high myopia (1.2; 95% CI, 1.14-1.27; P < 0.001). Lattice degeneration conferred the highest odds of RT (43.86; 95% CI, 41.39-46.49; P < 0.001). Conclusion: In the IRIS Registry, RRD occurs in approximately 1 in 500 cataract surgeries in patients aged > 40 years within 1 year of surgery. The presence of LD conferred the highest odds for RRD and RT after surgery. Additional risk factors for RRD included male gender, younger age, hypermature cataract, PVD, and high myopia. These data may be useful during the informed consent process for cataract surgery and help identify patients at a higher risk of retinal complications. Financial Disclosures: The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

Thyroid Eye Disease and its Vision-Threatening Manifestations in the Academy IRIS Registry: 2014-2018.

PURPOSE: To evaluate prevalence of thyroid eye disease (TED) and associated factors in the American Academy of Ophthalmology IRISⓇ Registry (Intelligent Research in Sight). DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of the IRIS Registry. METHODS: IRIS Registry patients (18-90 years old) were classified as TED (ICD-9: 242.00, ICD-10: E05.00 on ≥2 visits) or non-TED cases, and prevalence was estimated. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) were estimated using logistic regression. RESULTS: 41,211 TED patients were identified. TED prevalence was 0.09%, showed a unimodal age distribution (highest prevalence in ages 50-59 years (y) (0.12%)), higher rates in females than males (0.12% vs. 0.04%) and in non-Hispanics than Hispanics (0.10% vs. 0.05%). Prevalence differed by race (from 0.08% in Asians to 0.12% in Black/African-Americans), with varying peak ages of prevalence. Factors associated with TED in multivariate analysis included age: ((18-<30y (reference), 30-39y: OR (95%CI) 2.2 (2.0, 2.4), 40-49y: 2.9 (2.7,3.1), 50-59y: 3.3 (3.1, 3. 5), 60-69y: 2.7 (2.54, 2.85), 70+: 1.5 (1.46, 1.64)); female sex vs male (reference), 3.5 (3.4,3.6), race: White (reference), Blacks: 1.1 (1.1,1.2), Asian: 0.9 (0.8,0.9), Hispanic ethnicity vs not Hispanic (reference), 0.68 (0.6,0.7), smoking status: (never (ref), former: 1.64 (1.6,1.7), current 2.16: (2.1,2.2)) and Type 1 diabetes (yes vs no (reference): 1.87 (1.8, 1.9). CONCLUSIONS: This epidemiologic profile of TED includes new observations such as a unimodal age distribution and racial variation in prevalence. Associations with female sex, smoking, and Type 1 diabetes are consistent with prior reports. These findings raise novel questions about TED in different populations.

Geographic and socioeconomic access disparities to Phase 3 clinical trials in ophthalmology in the United States.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: To identify geographic and socioeconomic variables associated with residential proximity to Phase 3 ophthalmology clinical trial sites. METHODS: The geographic location of clinical trial sites for Phase 3 clinical trials in ophthalmology was identified using ClinicalTrials.gov. Driving time from each United States (US) census tract centroid to nearest clinical trial site was calculated using real traffic patterns. Travel data were crosslinked to census-tract level public datasets from United States Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS). Cross-sectional multivariable regression was used to identify associations between census-tract sociodemographic factors and driving time (>60 min) from each census tract centroid to the nearest clinical trial site. RESULTS: There were 2330 unique clinical trial sites and 71,897 census tracts. Shortest median time was to retina sites [33.7 min (18.7, 70.1 min)]. Longest median time was to neuro-ophthalmology sites [119.8 min (48.7, 240.4 min)]. Driving >60 min was associated with rural tracts [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 7.60; 95% CI (5.66-10.20), p < 0.0001]; Midwest [aOR 1.84(1.15-2.96), p = 0.01], South [aOR 2.57 (1.38-4.79), p < 0.01], and West [aOR 2.52 (1.52-4.17), p < 0.001] v. Northeast; and tracts with higher visual impairment [aOR 1.07 (1.03-1.10), p < 0.001)]; higher poverty levels [4th v.1st Quartile of population below poverty, aOR 2.26 (1.72-2.98), p < 0.0001]; and lower education levels [high school v. Bachelor's degree or higher aOR 1.02 (1.00-1.03), p = 0.0072]. CONCLUSIONS: There are significant geographic and socioeconomic disparities in access to ophthalmology clinical trial sites for rural, non-Northeastern, poorer, and lower education level census tracts, and for census tracts with higher levels of self-reported visual impairment.

Authorship Trends of Women in Retina: A 25-Year Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the trends in first and last authorship of women within clinical retina research over the last 25 years. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: First and last author names were retrieved from original articles published between January 1, 1995, and January 1, 2021, in the American Journal of Ophthalmology, JAMA Ophthalmology (Archives of Ophthalmology), Ophthalmology, and Retina. METHODS: The medical subject heading major term "retina" was used in PubMed to filter publications specific to the field of retina. Publications by single authors and collaborative study groups and those classified as comments, letters, and editorials were excluded. First and last author names were obtained, and Gender API was used to assign sex. Names were crosschecked with the American Society of Retina Specialists (ASRS) directory for United States-based authors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of male and female first and last authors throughout the study period and the association between first and last authorship gender were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 4142 articles were included. The percentage of women in first and last authorship positions significantly increased from 23% to 37.7% and 14.2% to 24.6%, respectively, over 25 years (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). When the last authors were women, 32.5% of the first authors were women, and when the last authors were men, 27.1% of the first authors were women (P = 0.002). Based on the ASRS 2020 directory, 17% of practicing retina specialists in the United States were women in 2020. For publications in 2020, 28.2% of the first authors and 22.3% of the last authors of retina publications from the United States were women (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Although a disparity in authorship persists in the subspecialties of ophthalmology, this data suggest that retina is a field where the gap is improving. Mentorship by senior female authors is associated with a higher proportion of female first authors.

Effect of the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic on Authorship Gender Disparities in the Ophthalmology Literature.

Background Studies in several fields of medicine have found that women published less during the COVID-19 pandemic, potentially due to an increase in domestic responsibilities. This study examines whether a similar pattern exists for female authorship in ophthalmology. Purpose To compare the proportions of female authorship published in high-impact ophthalmology journals before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods A cross-sectional study analyzing authorship gender of articles published during the COVID-19 pandemic (between July and September 2020) compared with matched articles published in the same journals before the COVID-19 pandemic (between July and September 2019). Gender of the first and last authors was analyzed using an online gender determination tool. Results A total of 577 articles and 1,113 authors were analyzed. There was no significant difference in the average number of publications by male and female authors before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. There was a significant increase in the percentage of female first authorship from the prepandemic period (32%) to during the COVID-19 pandemic (40%; p = 0.01), but no significant increase in the last authorship ( p > 0.05). When analyzing only research articles, a similar increase in female first authorship was noted when comparing the publications before (31%) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (43%; p = 0.02). No significant differences were noted when analyzing the editorials ( p > 0.05). Conclusion While disparities continue to exist between male and female authorship, an increase in female first authorship was noted during the COVID-19 pandemic for overall articles as well as research articles. Precis During the COVID-19 pandemic, female authorship as first and last authors of peer-reviewed articles in high-impact ophthalmology journals was below 50%. However, while the overall rates of female authorship were unchanged, female first authorship significantly increased during the pandemic. These results differ from studies published in other medical fields that demonstrated a decrease in female authorship during the COVID-19 pandemic.

[Persistent fatigue symptoms following COVID-19 infection in healthcare workers: risk factors and impact on quality of life]. / Anhaltende Fatigue als Folge einer COVID-19-Infektion bei Beschäftigten im Gesundheitswesen: Risikofaktoren und Auswirkungen auf die Lebensqualität.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Employees from medical and nursing professions are at increased risk for a SARS-CoV­2 infection and thus more frequently affected by COVID-19 sequelae. Previous studies have identified post-viral fatigue as the most common sequelae. The aim of this study was to investigate risk factors and effects induced by clinically relevant fatigue symptoms following a COVID-19 infection of healthcare workers. METHODS: In the spring of 2021, 4315 insured members of the Statutory Accident Insurance and Prevention in the Health and Welfare Service were contacted for a written survey on their COVID-19 disease in 2020 and its sequelae. Information on Symptoms of acute infection, disease sequelae, and potential risk factors were collected, as well as the physical and mental health status after SARS-CoV­2 infection. The general fatigue scale of the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI) was used as fatigue screening. Regression analyses and multivariate analyses of variance were calculated for data analysis. RESULTS: Of the respondents, 10.7% showed severe fatigue symptoms. Identified risk factors for clinical fatigue symptoms included preexisting mental and respiratory conditions and severity of acute infection. Furthermore, severe long-/post-COVID fatigue was associated with higher psychological distress, lower health-related quality of life, and more frequent incapacity to work. CONCLUSIONS: Severe long-/post-COVID fatigue is associated with a high level of distress, which requires specific rehabilitation approaches and poses a challenge to the social insurance agencies and accident insurers to develop appropriate rehabilitation concepts.

Age, Gender, and Laterality of Retinal Vascular Occlusion: A Retrospective Study from the IRIS® Registry.

PURPOSE: Retinal vascular occlusion is a leading cause of profound irreversible visual loss, but the understanding of the disease is insufficient. We systematically investigated the age, gender, and laterality at the onset of retinal artery occlusion (RAO) and retinal vein occlusion (RVO) in the Intelligent Research in Sight (IRIS®) Registry. DESIGN: Retrospective registry cohort. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with retinal vascular occlusion participating in the IRIS® Registry. METHODS: Patients who received a diagnosis of retinal vascular occlusion between 2013 and 2017 were included. Those with unspecified gender or laterality were excluded when conducting the relevant analyses. Patients were categorized into RAO, with subtypes transient retinal artery occlusion (TRAO), partial retinal artery occlusion (PRAO), branch retinal artery occlusion (BRAO), and central retinal artery occlusion (CRAO), and into RVO, with subtypes venous engorgement (VE), branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO), and central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO). Age was evaluated as a categorical variable (5-year increments). We investigated the association of age, gender, and laterality with the onset frequency of retinal vascular occlusion subtypes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The frequency of onset of RAO and RVO subtypes by age, gender and laterality. RESULTS: A total of 1 251 476 patients with retinal vascular occlusion were included, 23.8% of whom had RAO, whereas 76.2% had RVO. Of these, 1 248 656 and 798 089 patients were selected for analyses relevant to gender and laterality, respectively. The onset frequency of all subtypes increased with age. PRAO, BRAO, CRAO, and CRVO presented more frequently in men (53.5%, 51.3%, 52.6%, and 50.4%, respectively), whereas TRAO, VE, and BRVO presented more frequently in women (54.9%, 56.0%, and 54.5% respectively). All RAO subtypes and BRVO showed a right-eye onset preference (TRAO, 51.7%; PRAO, 54.4%; BRAO, 53.5%; CRAO, 53.4%; and BRVO, 51.0%), whereas VE and CRVO exhibited a left-eye onset preference (53.3% and 50.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Although retinal vascular occlusion incidence increases with age regardless of subtypes, we found various subtype-specific disease-onset differences related to gender and, in particular, ocular laterality. These findings may improve understanding of the specific cause of retinal vascular occlusions of different subtypes and their relationships with structural and anatomic asymmetries of the vascular system.

Ocriplasmin for treatment of vitreomacular traction and macular hole: A systematic literature review and individual participant data meta-analysis of randomized, controlled, double-masked trials.

Ocriplasmin is used to treat vitreomacular traction (VMT), with or without full-thickness macular hole (MH). We systematically reviewed the evidence on ocriplasmin's effect on vitreomacular adhesion resolution (VMAR), MH closure, vitrectomy, and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and investigated the effect of baseline covariates on outcome. We applied individual participant data meta-analyses to the entire population and to subgroups defined by MH or epiretinal membrane (ERM) presence. Safety data were pooled and tabulated. Five randomized controlled trials (1,067 participants) were included. Six months after treatment, ocriplasmin achieved higher rates of VMAR and MH closure versus control, lowered vitrectomy odds, and increased the likelihood of a ≥10-letter BCVA increase. VMAR rates were lower when ERM, broad VMA (> 1500 µm), diabetic retinopathy, or pseudophakia were present and higher in younger participants, women, and eyes with MHs. Ocriplasmin-treated participants experienced more short-term visual impairment that was not predictive of final BCVA, as well as vitreous floaters, photopsia, photophobia, eye pain, blurred vision, and dyschromatopsia. The most common serious adverse events for ocriplasmin and control, respectively, were MH progression (22.5%, 17.3%), new MH (1.5%, 3.4%) and retinal detachment (0.8%, 1.2%). Ocriplasmin promotes VMAR and MH closure. Transient visual phenomena are not uncommon.

Female Editorial Authorship Trends in High-Impact Ophthalmology Journals.

IMPORTANCE: Individuals with perceived experience and expertise are invited by editorial boards to provide commentary through editorials. Female representation among editorialists is not yet defined. OBJECTIVE: To determine female representation as editorial authors in 3 high-impact general ophthalmology journals. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study investigates the proportion of female authorship in editorials published between 2005 to 2009 and 2015 to 2019 in 3 journals: Ophthalmology, JAMA Ophthalmology, and American Journal of Ophthalmology. Data were collected from April to June 2020. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Proportions of female first and senior (last or solo) authors between 2005 to 2009 compared with 2015 to 2019. Secondary outcome measures include representation by sex across degree types and subspecialties. Comparisons were made for all editorialists and ophthalmologist editorialists. RESULTS: Of 814 editorial articles, there were 1179 (first and senior) authors identified. Women held 301 (25.5%) of these authorships, including 116 of 365 first authorships (32.9%) and 185 of 814 senior authorships (23.9%). Overall, female first and senior authorships grew by 68.0% between 2005 to 2009 and 2015 to 2019 (85 of 469 [18.1%] vs 216 of 710 [30.4%]; difference, 12.3%; 95% CI, 7.4-317.2; P < .001). Between 2005 to 2009 and 2015 to 2019, first and senior authorships by women increased (first: 33 of 133 [24.8%] vs 83 of 232 [35.8%]; difference, 11.0%; 95% CI, 1.4-320.6; P = .03; senior: 52 of 336 [15.5%] vs 133 of 478 [27.8%]; difference, 12.3%; 95% CI, 6.8-317.9; P < .001). JAMA Ophthalmology most substantially contributed to the increase in female first and senior authorships (13.8% and 16%), although the test for homogeneity among the 3 journals was not significant. The proportion of female ophthalmologist first authors was greater than the proportion of American Board of Ophthalmology-certified female ophthalmologists (81 of 281 [28.9%] vs 123 of 672 [18.3%]; difference, 10.6%; 95% CI, 5.3-315.9; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The proportion of female senior authors increased by 68.0% between 2005 to 2009 and 2015 to 2019, but female authors represented only 25.5% of editorialists. Compared with male ophthalmologists, female ophthalmologists were more commonly first than senior authors. Additionally, female authors were more likely to be nonophthalmologists or to hold nonmedical, non-PhD degrees. While the swelling rank of female editorialists has paralleled the rising proportion of female ophthalmologists over time, parity by sex has yet to be attained. Greater awareness of disparities and strategies to mitigate them may help equalize representation.

A Randomized Trial to Improve Adherence to Follow-up Eye Examinations Among People With Glaucoma.

INTRODUCTION: Appointment nonadherence is common among people with glaucoma, making it difficult for eye care providers to monitor glaucoma progression. Our objective was to determine whether the use of patient navigators, in conjunction with social worker support, could increase adherence to recommended follow-up eye appointments. METHODS: A randomized, controlled trial evaluated the effectiveness of an intervention that used patient navigators and social workers to improve patient adherence to follow-up eye care compared with usual care. Participants with glaucoma and other eye diseases (N = 344) were identified at primary care clinics in community settings through telemedicine screening of imaging and then randomized to enhanced intervention (EI) or usual care (UC). Data on participants' visits with local ophthalmologists were collected for up to 3 years from randomization. Groups were compared for timely attendance at the first visit with the local ophthalmologist and adherence to recommended follow-up visits. RESULTS: Timely attendance at the first visit was higher for EI than UC (74.4% vs 39.0%; average relative risk [aRR] = 1.85; 95% CI, 1.51-2.28; P < .001). Rates of adherence to recommended annual follow-up during year 1 were 18.6% in the EI group and 8.1% in the usual care group (aRR = 2.08; 95% CI, 1.14-3.76; P = .02). The aRR across years 2 and 3 was 3.92 (95% CI, 1.24-12.43; P = .02). CONCLUSION: An intervention using patient navigators and social workers doubled the rate of adherence to annual recommended follow-up eye care compared with usual care in community settings, and was effective at increasing connections with local ophthalmologists. Interventions to further improve long-term adherence are needed.