INTRAVITREAL ANTI-VASCULAR ENDOTHELIAL GROWTH FACTOR PHARMACEUTICAL UTILIZATION AND FINANCIAL IMPACT IN A VALUE-BASED CARE PROGRAM.

PURPOSE: To investigate trends and the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the utilization of intravitreal antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) pharmaceuticals in an accountable care organization (ACO). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services beneficiary claims for all patients in the Houston Methodist Coordinated Care ACO registry during the years 2018, 2019, and 2020. RESULTS: Across the 3 years studied, a mean of 708 patients received anti-VEGF injections per year. The percentage of patients who received anti-VEGF injections decreased in each sequential year, with a steeper decline during the COVID-19 pandemic in the year 2020 (decrease by 0.4% from 2019 to 2020, P < 0.001; decrease by 0.2% from 2018 to 2019, P = 0.1453). The percentage of patients receiving bevacizumab of the total number of patients receiving any anti-VEGF treatment decreased (bevacizumab decreased by 6% from 2019 to 2020, P = 0.0174; decreased by 7% from 2018 to 2019, P = 0.0074). The COVID-19 pandemic did not seem to correlate with a change in the distribution of the specific anti-VEGF injection used. CONCLUSION: Despite the lower price which may correlate with value-based care, bevacizumab was the least used anti-VEGF treatment. COVID-19 correlated with a larger decrease in the utilization of all three anti-VEGF drugs.

Real-Time Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Score Level versus Ultra-Widefield Leakage Index-Guided Management of Diabetic Retinopathy: Two-Year Outcomes from the Randomized PRIME Trial.

The prospective PRIME trial applied real-time, objective imaging biomarkers to determine individualized retreatment needs with intravitreal aflibercept injections (IAI) among eyes with diabetic retinopathy (DR). 40 eyes with nonproliferative or proliferative DR without diabetic macular edema received monthly IAI until a DR severity scale (DRSS) level improvement of ≥2 steps was achieved. Eyes were randomized 1:1 to DRSS- or PLI- guided management. At the final 2-year visit, DRSS level was stable or improved compared to baseline in all eyes, and mean PLI decreased by 11% (p = 0.73) and 23.6% (p = 0.25) in the DRSS- and PLI-guided arms. In both arms, the percent of pro re nata (PRN) visits requiring IAI was significantly higher in year 2 versus 1 (p < 0.0001). The percent of PRN visits receiving IAI during year 1 was significantly correlated with the percent of PRN visits with IAI during year 2 (p < 0.0001). Through week 104, 77.4% of instances of DRSS level worsening in the DRSS-guided arm were preceded by or occurred alongside an increase of PLI. Overall, consistent IAI re-treatment interval requirements were observed longitudinally among individual patients. Additionally, PLI increases appeared to precede DRSS level worsening, highlighting PLI as a valuable biomarker in the management of DR.

Rationale for American Society of Retina Specialists Best Practice Recommendations for Conducting Vitreoretinal Surgery during the COVID-19 Era.

PURPOSE: To detail the rationale behind recommendations recently published by the American Society of Retina Specialists (ASRS) outlining best practices for safety of vitreoretinal surgeons and staff while performing vitreoretinal surgery during the coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic. METHODS: The committee for ASRS Best Practices for Retinal Surgery during the COVID-19 Pandemic reviewed existing evidence and information on SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and risk factors during vitreoretinal surgery. Recommendations were based on best available published data, cumulative clinical experiences, and recommendations and policies from other organizations. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the strength of recommendations and confidence in the evidence. These serve as interim recommendations which are routinely updated given gaps of knowledge and lack of high-quality data on this evolving subject. RESULTS: Relevant existing literature related to methods of transmission, and ocular manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 are summarized. The data and clinical experiences driving recommendations for pre-operative, intraoperative and post-operative surgical considerations, anesthesia choice, as well as considerations for intravitreal injections are provided. CONCLUSION: Recommendations are provided with the goal of protecting vitreoretinal surgeons and associated personnel from exposure to SARS-CoV-2 during interventional vitreoretinal procedures. This is a rapidly evolving topic with numerous remaining gaps in our current knowledge. As such, recommendations will evolve and the current manuscript is intended to serve as a foundation for continued dialogue on best practices.

Frequency of Urgent or Emergent Vitreoretinal Surgical Procedures in the United States During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: The American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) indicated that urgent or emergent vitreoretinal surgical procedures should continue during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Although decreases in the frequency of critical procedures have been reported outside the field of ophthalmology, analyses are limited by volume, geography, and time. Objective: To evaluate whether the frequency of ophthalmic surgical procedures deemed urgent or emergent by the AAO changed across the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: Vitreoretinal practices from 17 institutions throughout the US participated in this multicenter cross-sectional study. The frequency of 11 billed vitreoretinal Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes across respective weeks was obtained from each practice between January 1, 2019, and May 31, 2020. Data were clustered into intravitreal injections (code 67028), lasers and cryotherapy (codes 67141, 67145, and 67228), retinal detachment (RD) repairs (codes 67107, 67108, 67110, and 67113), and other vitrectomies (codes 67036, 67039, and 67040). Institutions were categorized by region (Northeast, Midwest, South, and West Coast), practice setting (academic [tax-exempt] or private [non-tax-exempt]), and date of respective statewide stay-at-home orders. Main Outcomes and Measures: Nationwide changes in the frequency of billing for urgent or emergent vitreoretinal surgical procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: A total of 526 536 CPT codes were ascertained: 483 313 injections, 19 257 lasers or cryotherapy, 14 949 RD repairs, and 9017 other vitrectomies. Relative to 2019, a weekly institutional decrease in injections was observed from March 30 to May 2, 2020, with a maximal 38.6% decrease (from a mean [SD] of 437.8 [436.3] to 273.8 [269.0] injections) from April 6 to 12, 2020 (95% CI, -259 to -69 injections; P = .002). A weekly decrease was also identified that spanned a longer interval, at least until study conclusion (March 16 to May 31, 2020), for lasers and cryotherapy, with a maximal 79.6% decrease (from a mean [SD] of 6.6 [7.7] to 1.5 [2.0] procedures) from April 6 to 12, 2020 (95% CI, -6.8 to -3.3 procedures; P < .001), for RD repairs, with a maximal 59.4% decrease (from a mean [SD] of 3.5 [4.0] to 1.6 [2.2] repairs) from April 13 to 19, 2020 (95% CI, -2.7 to -1.4 repairs; P < .001), and for other vitrectomies, with a maximal 84.3% decrease (from a mean [SD] of 3.0 [3.1] to 0.4 [0.8] other vitrectomies) from April 6 to 12, 2020 (95% CI, -3.3 to -1.8 other vitrectomies; P < .001). No differences were identified by region, setting, or state-level stay-at-home order adjustment. Conclusions and Relevance: Although the AAO endorsed the continued performance of urgent or emergent vitreoretinal surgical procedures, the frequency of such procedures throughout the country experienced a substantial decrease that may persist after the COVID-19 pandemic's initial exponential growth phase. This decrease appears independent of region, setting, and state-level stay-at-home orders. It is unknown to what extent vitreoretinal intervention would have decreased without AAO recommendations, and how the decrease is associated with outcomes. Although safety is paramount during the COVID-19 pandemic, practices should consider prioritizing availability for managing high-acuity conditions until underlying reasons for the reduction are fully appreciated.

Ophthalmology conferences in the coronavirus disease 2019 era.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To discuss key considerations involved in adapting an in-person ophthalmology conference to a virtual medium. RECENT FINDINGS: In 2020, several ophthalmological societies have held or are planning to hold virtual conferences in lieu of their previously scheduled in-person ophthalmology conference because of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The strategic meeting components attempted to be retained in these transitions include educational information disseminating, academic discussion with colleagues, sponsorships, and networking. Live-streamed components of a virtual conference may be entirely real time or may include a combination of both prerecorded and live-streamed components. A virtual meeting may offer either a single live-streamed program or several concurrent live-streamed programs from which attendees can choose. The availability of on-demand content, mechanisms for audience participation, avenues for industry interaction and contribution, registration costs, and continuing medical education credit availability vary between virtual meeting formats. SUMMARY: Transition of an in-person ophthalmology conference to a virtual format with retention of the inherent value associated with the meeting is possible and the experiences of societies executing this adaptation can be helpful for others entering this space. There are numerous considerations regarding meeting format and logistics to contemplate in light of each meeting's specific audience and objectives.