Treatment of Noninfectious Uveitic Macular Edema with Periocular and Intraocular Corticosteroid Therapies: A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.

PURPOSE: To review the evidence on the effectiveness and complications of periocular and intraocular corticosteroid therapies for noninfectious uveitic macular edema. METHODS: A literature search of the PubMed database was conducted last in December 2021 and a post-assessment search was conducted in March 2023. The searches were limited to articles published in English and no date restrictions were imposed. The combined searches yielded 739 citations; 53 articles were selected for inclusion because the studies (1) evaluated periocular corticosteroid injection, intraocular corticosteroid injection or implant, suprachoroidal corticosteroid injection, or a combination thereof for uveitic macular edema; (2) had outcomes that included visual acuity (VA) or macular edema assessed clinically or imaged by OCT or fluorescein angiography; and (3) included more than 20 patients. RESULTS: This assessment reviewed 23 articles that provided level I or level II evidence from 18 studies on the use of periocular, suprachoroidal, and intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injections and intravitreal dexamethasone and fluocinolone acetonide implants or inserts in noninfectious uveitic macular edema. These reports consistently demonstrated that all investigated periocular and intraocular corticosteroid therapies improved VA, macular structure, or both. One comparative study showed that intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection and the dexamethasone intravitreal implant had effectiveness superior to that of periocular triamcinolone acetonide injection for these outcomes. As a group, the studies highlighted the potential for these therapies to elevate intraocular pressure and to accelerate cataract formation. CONCLUSIONS: The published literature provides high-quality evidence that periocular and intraocular corticosteroid therapies are effective and safe for the treatment of noninfectious uveitic macular edema. However, information on the relative effectiveness and complication rates across the different therapies is limited. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

PSEUDOMONAS ENDOPHTHALMITIS AFTER 0.59 MG FLUOCINOLONE ACETONIDE SURGICAL IMPLANT IN A PATIENT WITH A LONG-STANDING CRAWFORD TUBE.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to report a case of Pseudomonas aeruginosa endophthalmitis after surgical 0.59 mg fluocinolone acetonide implant in a patient with a long-standing Crawford tube. METHODS: This was a retrospective case review. RESULTS: A 52-year-old woman with a history of bilateral sarcoid-associated panuveitis and nasolacrimal duct obstructions treated with dacryocystorhinostomies and long-standing Crawford tubes underwent placement of a surgical fluocinolone acetonide implant. The Crawford tube was visible throughout the surgery and notably exhibited small amounts of rotation and prolapse with manipulation of the eye. On postoperative Day 4, the patient presented urgently with pain and decreased visual acuity. Endophthalmitis was suspected, and a vitreous tap and intravitreal injections of vancomycin and amikacin were performed. Cultures grew P. aeruginosa. Initially she responded to treatment with no evidence of intraocular infection or inflammation by postoperative Week 3. However, at postoperative Week 4, the patient returned with a yellow purulent subconjunctival nodule and surrounding scleral injection. A second nodule appeared 2 weeks later. The patient was treated with topical and systemic antibiotics. The nodules responded well to treatment showing notable consolidation and revealing an area of scleral thinning as they regressed. CONCLUSION: We present a case of P. aeruginosa endophthalmitis and presumed scleritis after the surgical fluocinolone acetonide implant placement in an eye with a Crawford nasolacrimal tube effectively treated with topical, intravitreal, and systemic antibiotics. Long-standing nasolacrimal duct hardware may allow reflux of nasopharyngeal and nasolacrimal bacteria, contaminating the ocular surface during surgery.

Use of fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant to manage chronic panuveitis for long-term inflammatory control without interfering with systemic immunity.

We report 2 patients with chronic panuveitis who were treated with fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant (Yutiq, EyePoint Pharmaceuticals Inc, Watertown, MA) intended to control ocular inflammation long term without interfering with systemic immunity. The first case was a man in his 50s referred for ocular complaints in the setting of ongoing immunotherapy for the treatment of metastatic melanoma. He was diagnosed with bilateral drug-induced panuveitis. Treatment objectives were outlined as reduction of inflammation, prevention of uveitis recurrence, and continuation of systemic immunomodulatory therapy in order to maintain malignancy remission; the patient was treated with fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant bilaterally and at 18 months' follow-up had 20/20 bilateral visual acuity and no inflammation. In case 2, a woman in her 70s, presented with a 2-month history of worsening floaters and blurry vision. She was phakic, with bilateral nuclear sclerotic cataracts, 1+ vitreous cells and 2+ haze, diffuse vasculitis, and central leakage around the optic nerve and posterior pole. She was diagnosed with bilateral idiopathic panuveitis with retinal vasculitis. The patient continued to do well at 1 year following intravitreal implantation with fluocinolone acetonide.

Indicators of Post-Operative Intraocular Pressure Elevation after Naïve Fluocinolone Acetonide Surgical Implantation.

PURPOSE: To determine factors conferring an increased risk of developing ocular hypertension secondary to the fluocinolone acetonide (FA) sustained-release surgical implant (Retisert). DESIGN: Retrospective, observational case series. METHODS: Patients with a history of chronic noninfectious posterior uveitis undergoing naïve surgical FA implantation from 2007 to 2018 at the University of Colorado were studied. Patient demographics and multiple clinical measures were noted one year before and after FA implantation. RESULTS: Twenty-nine eyes of 21 patients were studied. The median age experiencing an IOP rise vs median age experiencing no IOP rise post-FA implantation was 27.0 and 54.0 years old, respectively (p = .01). A pre-FA implant risk factor of needing future glaucoma surgery after FA implantation is prior to maximum IOP (p = .02). CONCLUSIONS: A risk factor of elevated post-FA implantation IOP includes younger age. A potential risk factor for glaucoma surgery after FA implantation was higher maximum IOP before FA implantation.

Treatment of Acute Zonal Occult Outer Retinopathy With Intravitreal Steroids.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To report on the use of intravitreal steroids in the management of acute zonal occult outer retinopathy (AZOOR), a rare disorder affecting the outer retina. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective case series of nine eyes of five patients with AZOOR who received intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA), dexamethasone intravitreal implant, and/or fluocinolone acetonide implant. Treatment response was determined by reported symptoms and multimodal imaging findings. Patients were observed for at least 1 year following intravitreal steroid treatment (range: 14 months to 63 months). RESULTS: Seven eyes received IVTA, six eyes received the dexamethasone intravitreal implant, and one eye received the fluocinolone acetonide implant. All patients experienced disease stability or improvement based on symptomatic response and multimodal imaging findings after intravitreal steroids. One eye developed central serous retinopathy, and another eye a choroidal neovascular membrane. Five of nine eyes experienced ocular hypertension. All phakic eyes developed cataracts. CONCLUSION: Intravitreal steroids effectively achieved disease stability in patients with AZOOR. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2018;49:504-509.].

ILUVIEN® technology in the treatment of center-involving diabetic macular edema: a review of the literature.

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is one of the major causes of blindness, caused primarily by hyperglycemia and results from multiple pathological processes mostly secondary to increased levels of VEGF and other inflammatory cytokines. DME management includes control of systemic risk factors together with laser photocoagulation, frequent intraocular injections of anti-VEGF agents and steroids implants. Recent adoption of novel alternative drug delivery options has led to the development of sustained release ocular implants with longer duration of action with less injection frequency. This article will review the pharmacology and clinical data in terms of efficacy, safety and benefits of the sustained release steroid implants in treatment of DME with special emphasis on the fluocinolone acetonide ILUVIEN® implant.

Fluocinolone acetonide for the treatment of diabetic macular edema.

INTRODUCTION: Fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant is a non-erodible implant approved for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) insufficiently responsive to available therapies. Areas covered: The injectable intravitreal implant releases fluocinolone acetonide at an average rate of 0.2 µg/day for at least 36 months. The two pooled pivotal FAME trials showed that, in patients with DME previously treated with laser photocoagulation, fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant was more beneficial than sham injection when looking at the proportion of patients with an improvement from baseline in visual acuity of more than 15 letters at 24 months and at 36 months. Cataract (82%) and intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation (37%) were the most common adverse events. Raised IOP was mostly treated with IOP-lowering medications, with <5% of eyes requiring incisional IOP-lowering surgery. FAME trial program results are confirmed by a series of real-world studies in eyes with chronic/recalcitrant DME. Expert opinion: data indicate that fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant is a useful second-line option for the treatment of DME.

A Nonrandomized, Open-Label, Multicenter, Phase 4 Pilot Study on the Effect and Safety of ILUVIEN® in Chronic Diabetic Macular Edema Patients Considered Insufficiently Responsive to Available Therapies (RESPOND).

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of ILUVIEN® in patients with chronic diabetic macular edema (DME) who were insufficiently responsive to prior therapies. METHODS: This is a prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter, open-label, phase 4 pilot study assessing the effectiveness and safety of ILUVIEN® involving 12 patients insufficiently responsive to available therapies. Assessments were performed at screening, baseline, week 1, and months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12. Demographics, medical/ophthalmic history, prior laser, anti-VEGF, and steroid treatments, and lab tests were recorded at screening. A complete ophthalmic examination and SD-OCT were performed at screening and at all follow-up visits. RESULTS: The patients showed improvements in best-corrected visual acuity (+3.7 letters), with greater improvement among pseudophakic patients (+6.8 letters) compared with phakic patients (-2.5 letters) 12 months after ILUVIEN®. The mean central subfield thickness decrease from baseline to month 12 was statistically significant, with a rapid reduction in the first week. Regarding safety, only 2 patients showed an intraocular pressure (IOP) increase over 25 mm Hg during the study, and the rise in IOP was well managed with eye drops only. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective and pilot study suggests that ILUVIEN® is safe and may be considered effective for chronic DME patients insufficiently responsive to other available therapies as it showed a rapid and sustained improvement of macular edema obtained after treatment with ILUVIEN®.

Report of 12-months efficacy and safety of intravitreal fluocinolone acetonide implant for the treatment of chronic diabetic macular oedema: a real-world result in the United Kingdom.

PurposeTo report the 12-months visual and anatomical outcomes of chronic diabetic macular oedema (DMO) treated with ILUVIEN in a real-world clinical practice in a single tertiary referral centre.MethodRetrospective data collection and analysis of consecutive 28 eyes of 23 diabetic patients received ILUVIEN implant for refractory DMO. Standard assessment included visual acuity (VA), central retinal thickness (CRT), slit-lamp biomicroscopy, and Goldmann tonometry for intraocular pressure (IOP) at 1, 6, and 12 months.ResultsBaseline mean VA was 47 (SD 18) letters improved to 55 (SD 17) letters (P=0.004) at 12 months. VA was improved in 16 eyes (57%), stabilised in 9 eyes (32%), and decreased in 3 eyes (11%). Seven eyes (25%) gained ≥15 letters, and 10 eyes (36%) gained >10 letters from baseline. The percentage of eyes achieved driving vision (≥70 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters) was doubled from baseline 18 to 36% at 6 months and 32% at 12 months. Mean CRT decreased by 198 µm from baseline 494 µm (SD 191) to 296 µm (SD 121) at 12 months (P<0.001). Two eyes received additional anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections after 10 months. COMPLICATIONS: Raised IOP in three eyes (11%) controlled with IOP-lowering drops, vitreous haemorrhage in one eye and one endophthalmitis (1 year vision improved to 6/24).ConclusionOur real-world results show that the visual and the anatomical improvements achieved by a single ILUVIEN implant injection were maintained up to 12 months with minimal adjunctive therapy. IOP monitoring remains essential in ILUVIEN patients, although our study shows a relatively low risk of IOP elevation post ILUVIEN injection, even in existing controlled ocular hypertension. Our results demonstrate that ILUVIEN is an effective long-term option in treating chronic refractory DMO.

Characterization of Intraocular Pressure Increases and Management Strategies Following Treatment With Fluocinolone Acetonide Intravitreal Implants in the FAME Trials.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To compare elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) management and outcomes among patients with diabetic macular edema who received fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implants versus sham-control treatment and explore the prior ocular steroid exposure impact on IOP outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was measured using Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study charts or electronic VA testers. Goldmann applanation tonometry was used to measure IOP. RESULTS: Elevated IOP was more common in FAc-versus sham control-treated patients. Medication, and less often trabeculoplasty or surgery, was used to lower IOP without affecting VA outcomes. No patient treated with 0.2 µg/day FAc who received prior ocular steroid required IOP-lowering surgery. CONCLUSION: Elevated IOP may occur following FAc implant receipt; however, in the present study, it was manageable and did not impact vision outcomes. Patients previously treated with ocular steroid did not require IOP-lowering surgery following 0.2 µg/day FAc implant administration. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2016;47:426-435.].

Forming a Consensus: Data and Guidance for Physicians Treating Diabetic Macular Edema.

The diabetic macular edema (DME) treatment paradigm has evolved as the understanding of the disease pathology has grown. Since 2012, four pharmacotherapies have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of DME. First-line treatment of DME with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor [VEGF] agents has become the gold standard; however, an appreciable percentage of patients do not respond to anti-VEGF therapies. In patients who inadequately respond to anti-VEGF therapies, the underlying disease pathology may be mediated by a multitude of growth factors and inflammatory cytokines. For these patients, corticosteroids are an attractive treatment option because they not only downregulate VEGF, but also an array of cytokines. The phase 3 MEAD and FAME trials demonstrated significant visual acuity improvements associated with dexamethasone and fluocinolone acetonide, respectively, in patients with DME; however, class-specific adverse events, including increased intraocular pressure and cataract development, must be considered before use. A panel of experts gathered during the 2015 annual meeting of the American Academy of Ophthalmology for a roundtable discussion focused on patient selection and adverse event management associated with the use of the 0.19 mg fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant.

Dissociations of the Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant: The Multicenter Uveitis Steroid Treatment (MUST) Trial and Follow-up Study.

PURPOSE: To describe fluocinolone acetonide implant dissociations in the Multicenter Uveitis Steroid Treatment (MUST) Trial. DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial with extended follow-up. METHODS: Review of data collected on the first implant in the eye(s) of participants. Dissociation was defined as the drug pellet no longer being affixed to the strut and categorized as spontaneous or surgically related. RESULTS: A total of 250 eyes (146 patients) had at least 1 implant placed. Median follow-up time after implant placement was 6 years (range 0.5-9.2 years). Thirty-four dissociations were reported in 30 participants. There were 22 spontaneous events in 22 participants; 6-year cumulative risk of a spontaneous dissociation was 4.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.4%-9.1%). The earliest event occurred 4.8 years after placement. Nine of 22 eyes with data had a decline in visual acuity ≥5 letters temporally related to the dissociation. Thirty-nine implant removal surgeries were performed, 33 with replacement. Twelve dissociations were noted during implant removal surgeries in 10 participants (26%, 95% CI 15%-48%); 5 of these eyes had a decline in visual acuity ≥5 letters after surgery. The time from implant placement to removal surgery was longer for the surgeries at which dissociated implants were identified than for those without one (5.7 vs 3.7 years, P < .001). Overall, visual acuity declined 15 or more letters from pre-implant values in 22% of affected eyes; declines were frequently associated with complications of uveitis or its treatment. CONCLUSION: There is an increasing risk of dissociation of Retisert implants during follow-up; the risk is greater with removal/exchange surgeries, but the risk of both spontaneous and surgically related events increases with longevity of the implants. In 22% of affected eyes visual acuity declined by 15 letters. In the context of eyes with moderate to severe uveitis for years, this rate is not unexpected.

Corticosteroids: Triamcinolone, Dexamethasone and Fluocinolone.

Steroids have been extensively used to treat macular edema due to diabetic retinopathy, venous occlusive disease, ocular inflammation and, to a lesser extent, also in some cases of choroidal neovascularization. The various intraocular steroids that have been employed include dexamethasone, triamcinolone and fluocinolone. During the past few years, new drug delivery methods for corticosteroids have been developed and are now part of our therapeutic armamentarium. This chapter provides a brief description of the pharmacology, efficacy and adverse effects associated with the use of steroids in various retinal diseases.

Fluocinolone acetonide for the treatment of diabetic macular edema.

In addition to VEGF inhibitors such as ranibizumab, aflibercept or bevacizumab, clinical and experimental investigations have revealed the great potential of steroids in the treatment of DME. At present two intravitreal steroid inserts are approved for the treatment of DME containing either dexamethasone or fluocinolone acetat (FA) as a pharmacological compound. The non degradable intravitreal FA insert releases 0.2 µg FA per day (Iluvien, Alimera Sciences). Clinical phase III studies have demonstrated the beneficial effect of the FA insert to last up to three years, especially in patients with a prolonged history of DME of at least three years at the initiation of therapy. While the treatment appears to be well tolerated over all, side effects such as cataract formation in nearly all treated phakic patients and raise of intraocular pressure need to be discussed with the patients as potential complications of the treatment.

Quality of Life and Risks Associated with Systemic Anti-inflammatory Therapy versus Fluocinolone Acetonide Intraocular Implant for Intermediate Uveitis, Posterior Uveitis, or Panuveitis: Fifty-four-Month Results of the Multicenter Uveitis Steroid Treatment Trial and Follow-up Study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the risks and quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes of fluocinolone acetonide implant versus systemic therapy with corticosteroid and immunosuppression when indicated for intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, and panuveitis. DESIGN: Additional follow-up of a randomized trial cohort. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred fifty-five patients with intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, or panuveitis, randomized to implant or systemic therapy. METHODS: Randomized subjects with intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, or panuveitis (479 eyes) were followed up over 54 months, with 79.2% completing the 54-month visit. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Local and systemic potential complications of the therapies and self-reported health utility and vision-related and generic health-related QoL were studied prospectively. RESULTS: Among initially phakic eyes, cataract and cataract surgery occurred significantly more often in the implant group (hazard ratio [HR], 3.0; P = 0.0001; and HR, 3.8; P < 0.0001, respectively). In the implant group, most cataract surgery occurred within the first 2 years. Intraocular pressure elevation measures occurred more frequently in the implant group (HR range, 3.7-5.6; all P < 0.0001), and glaucoma (assessed annually) also occurred more frequently (26.3% vs. 10.2% by 48 months; HR, 3.0; P = 0.0002). In contrast, potential complications of systemic therapy, including measures of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, bone disease, and hematologic and serum chemistry indicators of immunosuppression toxicity, did not differ between groups through 54 months. Indices of QoL initially favored implant therapy by a modest margin. However, all summary measures of health utility and vision-related or generic health-related QoL were minimally and nonsignificantly different by 54 months, with the exception of the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey physical component summary score, which favored implant by a small margin at 54 months (3.17 on a scale of 100; P = 0.01, not adjusted for multiple comparisons). Mean QoL results were favorable in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that fluocinolone acetonide implant therapy is associated with a clinically important increased risk of glaucoma and cataract with respect to systemic therapy, suggesting that careful monitoring and early intervention to prevent glaucoma is warranted with implant therapy. Systemic therapy subjects avoided a significant excess of toxicities of systemic corticosteroid and immunosuppressive therapies in the trial. Self-reported QoL measures initially favored implant therapy, but over time the measures converged, with generally favorable QoL in both groups.

[Ocular hypertension after intravitreal steroid injections: Clinical update as of 2015]. / Hypertonie oculaire après injections intra-vitréennes de corticoïdes, actualisation des connaissances en 2015.

Intravitreal injections are a therapeutic delivery method best suited to the treatment of retinal diseases. Recent years have been marked by the use of anti-VEGF agents as well as the arrival of sustained-release corticosteroid implants in France, replacing triamcinolone acetonide. A common complication of IVT steroids is secondary ocular hypertension (OHT) resulting from increased outflow resistance. This article summarizes current understanding. OHT induced by topical steroids has been described for 60 years. Intravitreal use also shows a temporary effect if the exposure is short, dose dependence, and varying incidence depending on the drug used. Sustained release formulations and discontinuing treatment have reduced the risk of induced OHT. Risk factors that induce OHT must be clearly identified prior to an injection. Most cases of OHT can be controlled medically, although differences exist between different drugs. In cases where it cannot be controlled, removal of the implant, selective laser trabeculoplasty, and filtration surgery can be discussed.