Management of macular oedema due to retinal vein occlusion: An evidence-based systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Central retinal vein occlusion and branch retinal vein occlusion are common causes of visual loss due to associated macular oedema. The aim of this review was to assess the effectiveness of interventions improving vision and treating macular oedema in central retinal vein occlusion and branch retinal vein occlusion. METHODS: Medical search engines and clinical trial registries were systematically searched. Randomised clinical trials with ≥90 eyes and real-world outcome studies with ≥100 eyes each with ≥6 months follow-up were included. RESULTS: There were 11 randomised controlled trials evaluating treatments for central retinal vein occlusion which met the inclusion criteria and 10 for branch retinal vein occlusion. There were 10 real world outcome studies of central retinal vein occlusion and 5 real world outcome studies of branch retinal vein occlusion. Meta-analysis was performed on studies that met the defined inclusion criteria. Main outcomes were change in visual acuity at 6-, 12-, 24- and 36 months by treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial derived growth factor is recommended as first line treatment over intravitreal corticosteroid due to its effectiveness and lower rate of ocular adverse events. Best outcomes are achieved when intravitreal treatment is started early. Macular laser may have an adjunctive role in branch retina vein occlusion but not central retinal vein occlusion.

One-year real-world outcomes of bevacizumab for the treatment of macular oedema secondary to retinal vein occlusion.

BACKGROUND: Bevacizumab is the only agent that many people can afford, yet there are only limited data on whether it improves macular oedema (MO) secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO) in real-world clinical practice. Here we studied 12-month real-world treatment outcomes of bevacizumab for RVO-related MO. METHODS: This was a multicentre, observational study analysing 12-month data from the Fight Retinal Blindness! (FRB) database. We studied treatment-naïve eyes with MO secondary to RVO commencing bevacizumab therapy between June 2009 and June 2019. Visual acuity (VA) and central subfield thickness (CST) were measured at baseline, 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome was a change in VA from baseline to 12 months. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty treatment naive eyes were analyzed. The baseline VA for BRVO was better than CRVO (55.8 vs. 42.6 LogMAR letters) and this gap widened over the 12-month period, with a 12-month VA change of +14.0 (95% CI 11.1, 16.8) letters for BRVO and + 11.9 (95% CI 6.4, 17.4) for CRVO. The mean CST at baseline was 511 µm for BRVO and 627 µm for CRVO, falling at 12 months by -155 µm (-190, -121) in BRVO and -198 µm (-252, -145) in CRVO. The median number of injections for BRVO and CRVO completers was 7 (5, 9). CONCLUSIONS: Bevacizumab can be an effective treatment of RVO-MO in a real-world setting with outcomes approaching those reported by the seminal clinical trials. The functional and anatomical outcomes of intravitreal therapy were better for BRVO than CRVO.

Using Lean Six Sigma techniques to improve efficiency in outpatient ophthalmology clinics.

BACKGROUND: Increasing patient numbers, complexity of patient management, and healthcare resource limitations have resulted in prolonged patient wait times, decreased quality of service, and decreased patient satisfaction in many outpatient services worldwide. This study investigated the impact of Lean Six Sigma, a service improvement methodology originally from manufacturing, in reducing patient wait times and increasing service capacity in a publicly-funded, tertiary referral outpatient ophthalmology clinic. METHODS: This quality improvement study compared results from two five-months audits of operational data pre- and post-implementation of Lean Six Sigma. A baseline audit was conducted to determine duration and variability of patient in-clinic time and number of patients seen per clinic session. Staff interviews and a time-in-motion study were conducted to identify issues reducing clinic service efficiency. Solutions were developed to address these root causes including: clinic schedule amendments, creation of dedicated postoperative clinics, and clear documentation templates. A post-implementation audit was conducted, and the results compared with baseline audit data. Significant differences in patient in-clinic time pre- and post-solution implementation were assessed using Mann-Whitney test. Differences in variability of patient in-clinic times were assessed using Brown-Forsythe test. Differences in numbers of patients seen per clinic session were assessed using Student's t-test. RESULTS: During the baseline audit period, 19.4 patients were seen per 240-minute clinic session. Median patient in-clinic time was 131 minutes with an interquartile range of 133 minutes (84-217 minutes, quartile 1- quartile 3). Targeted low/negligible cost solutions were implemented to reduce in-clinic times. During the post-implementation audit period, the number of patients seen per session increased 9% to 21.1 (p = 0.016). There was significant reduction in duration (p < 0.001) and variability (p < 0.001) of patient in-clinic time (median 107 minutes, interquartile range 91 minutes [71-162 minutes]). CONCLUSIONS: Lean Six Sigma techniques may be used to reduce duration and variability of patient in-clinic time and increase service capacity in outpatient ophthalmology clinics without additional resource input.

Neovascular age-related macular degeneration at treatment intervals of 14 weeks or greater.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the proportion of eyes with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) in routine clinical practice that reach ≥14 week treatment intervals and their outcomes. METHOD: We analysed data from the Fight Retinal Blindness! (FRB!) Project database, a prospectively designed registry of 'real-world' outcomes. Treatment-naive eyes starting vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors for nAMD from 1st January 2006 were included. Eyes were defined to have reached the ≥14 week treatment interval if they received ≥2 consecutive injections at treatment intervals of ≥14 week but not exceeding 26 weeks. Outcomes were reported in a subgroup of eyes that had 12 months of follow-up from reaching this interval. RESULTS: Of the 3907 treatment-naïve eyes that started treatment during the identified periods on a treat-and-extend regimen and received at least 8 injections over the first 2 years, 402 (10%) eyes received at least 2 consecutive injections at an interval of ≥14 week during their follow-up. Fifty-two percent of these eyes maintained vision to 12 months, however only 40% stayed at this interval and 25% of the lesions reactivated. CONCLUSION: We found that only 10% of eyes with nAMD were extended beyond a 13-week injection interval and that over half had returned to a shorter interval by 12 months. Eyes that stayed at this extended treatment interval maintained stable vision. More data on the outcomes of eyes treated with intervals longer than 3 months are required to establish whether emerging VEGF inhibitors provide a more sustained effect than the currently available drugs.

Preclinical and clinical studies of photobiomodulation therapy for macular oedema.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Diabetic macular oedema (DME) is the leading cause of visual impairment in people with diabetes. Intravitreal injections of vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors or corticosteroids prevent loss of vision by reducing DME, but the injections must be given frequently and usually for years. Here we report laboratory and clinical studies on the safety and efficacy of 670 nm photobiomodulation (PBM) for treatment of centre-involving DME. METHODS: The therapeutic effect of PBM delivered via a light-emitting diode (LED) device was tested in transgenic mice in which induced Müller cell disruption led to photoreceptor degeneration and retinal vascular leakage. We also developed a purpose-built 670 nm retinal laser for PBM to treat DME in humans. The effect of laser-delivered PBM on improving mitochondrial function and protecting against oxidative stress was studied in cultured rat Müller cells and its safety was studied in pigmented and non-pigmented rat eyes. We then used the retinal laser to perform PBM in an open-label, dose-escalation Phase IIa clinical trial involving 21 patients with centre-involving DME. Patients received 12 sessions of PBM over 5 weeks for 90 s per treatment at a setting of 25, 100 or 200 mW/cm2 for the three sequential cohorts of 6-8 patients each. Patients were recruited from the Sydney Eye Hospital, over the age of 18 and had centre-involving DME with central macular thickness (CMT) of >300 µm with visual acuity of 75-35 Log minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) letters (Snellen visual acuity equivalent of 20/30-20/200). The objective of this trial was to assess the safety and efficacy of laser-delivered PBM at 2 and 6 months. The primary efficacy outcome was change in CMT at 2 and 6 months. RESULTS: LED-delivered PBM enhanced photoreceptor mitochondrial membrane potential, protected Müller cells and photoreceptors from damage and reduced retinal vascular leakage resulting from induced Müller cell disruption in transgenic mice. PBM delivered via the retinal laser enhanced mitochondrial function and protected against oxidative stress in cultured Müller cells. Laser-delivered PBM did not damage the retina in pigmented rat eyes at 100 mW/cm2. The completed clinical trial found a significant reduction in CMT at 2 months by 59 ± 46 µm (p = 0.03 at 200 mW/cm2) and significant reduction at all three settings at 6 months (25 mW/cm2: 53 ± 24 µm, p = 0.04; 100 mW/cm2: 129 ± 51 µm, p < 0.01; 200 mW/cm2: 114 ± 60 µm, p < 0.01). Laser-delivered PBM was well tolerated in humans at settings up to 200 mW/cm2 with no significant side effects. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: PBM results in anatomical improvement of DME over 6 months and may represent a safe and non-invasive treatment. Further testing is warranted in randomised clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02181400 Graphical abstract.

Macular Atrophy Incidence and Progression in Eyes with Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration Treated with Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Inhibitors Using a Treat-and-Extend or a Pro Re Nata Regimen: Four-Year Results of the MANEX Study.

PURPOSE: To compare the incidence and progression of macular atrophy (MA) in eyes with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents using either a treat-and-extend (T&E) or a pro re nata (PRN) regimen over 4 years in a real-world setting. DESIGN: Four-year, multicenter, retrospective comparative study. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred sixty-four patients with treatment-naive nAMD. METHODS: Consecutive patients with nAMD received anti-VEGF therapy according to a T&E (n = 163) or PRN (n = 101) regimen. Eyes were included if they had received anti-VEGF injections for a period of at least 4 years and had undergone annual fundus autofluorescence (FAF) and OCT imaging using Heidelberg Spectralis. Two masked graders independently delineated areas of MA from serial FAF images using Heidelberg region finder software, and growth rates were calculated. Incident MA was assessed using proportional hazard ratios. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Macular atrophy incidence and progression over 4 years, association between treatment strategies, and number of injections. RESULTS: At baseline, MA was present in 24% and 20% of study eyes in T&E and PRN groups, respectively (P = 0.45). At year 4, 27% (34/124) and 25% (20/81) of eyes without baseline MA showed detectable MA in the T&E and PRN groups, respectively. In those with MA at baseline, the mean square root area of MA progressed by a rate of 0.4 ± 0.2 mm/year and 0.4 ± 0.1 mm/year in the T&E and PRN groups, respectively (P = 0.23). Multivariate analysis for baseline predictors of MA growth demonstrated that older age, poorer baseline visual acuity, and presence of retinal angiomatous proliferation had a higher risk of greater MA progression (P = 0.03). Regression analysis demonstrated no association between T&E and PRN treatment strategies with the risk of new MA developing during the 4 years of follow-up or the progression of pre-existing MA at year 4 (P = 0.692). CONCLUSIONS: Over 4 years, neither incidence nor progression of MA in eyes with nAMD treated with anti-VEGF injections was influenced by the treatment regimen and injection frequency. Eyes treated with a T&E regimen received more injections and achieved better visual outcomes compared with those treated with a PRN approach.

Ranibizumab or Aflibercept for Diabetic Macular Edema: Comparison of 1-Year Outcomes from the Fight Retinal Blindness! Registry.

PURPOSE: Both ranibizumab and aflibercept improved vision and decreased macular thickness in eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME) in clinical trials. This study compared the 12-month treatment outcomes of each drug in routine clinical practice. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of data from the prospectively designed observational Fight Retinal Blindness! registry. PARTICIPANTS: Treatment-naive eyes tracked in the registry that initiated treatment with either ranibizumab (0.5 mg) or aflibercept (2 mg) for DME from December 1, 2013, through June 1, 2018. METHODS: Visual acuity (VA) was analyzed at 12 months in all eyes (completers, noncompleters, and eyes that switched treatment). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the mean change in VA from baseline to 12 months. RESULTS: We identified 383 eyes (ranibizumab, n = 166 eyes; aflibercept, n = 217 eyes) of 291 patients. Eyes receiving aflibercept showed a lower mean VA (mean difference, -3.1 letters) and a thicker maculae (mean difference, +26 µm) at baseline than those receiving ranibizumab, which were not significantly different. Patients receiving ranibizumab were older (mean difference, +2.7 years). The adjusted mean difference in VA change and central subfield thickness (CST) reduction were, respectively, +1 letter (1.4 letters for aflibercept vs. 0.4 letter for ranibizumab; P = 0.4) and -30 µm (-85 vs. -55 µm; P < 0.01) in eyes with initial VA of 20/40 or better and +3 letters (10.6 vs. 7.6 letters; P < 0.01) and -46 µm (-148 vs. -102 µm; P < 0.02) in those with VA of 20/50 or worse. Eyes in the aflibercept group received more median injections over 12 months than the ranibizumab group although this difference was not significant (8 vs. 6 injections; P = 0.13). Treatment switches, albeit low, were more frequent from ranibizumab to aflibercept than vice versa. Significantly more eyes in the aflibercept group were lost to follow-up within 12 months (21% vs. 9% ranibizumab; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Both drugs were beneficial for DME. Aflibercept-treated eyes, which had borderline worse vision and thicker maculae at baseline, showed larger CST reductions after 12 months of treatment. Larger VA gains were observed with aflibercept treatment when the initial VA was 20/50 or worse.

Emerging corticosteroid delivery platforms for treatment of diabetic macular edema.

INTRODUCTION: Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a leading cause of vision impairment. Low-grade inflammation is thought to play a critical role in its pathogenesis. Although vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors are used first-line, not all eyes with DME respond optimally and may respond better to corticosteroids. Currently corticosteroids for DME are given intravitreally and require regular monitoring. There is an unmet need for longer lasting therapies and/or effective noninvasive therapies such as those given via oral or topical routes. AREAS COVERED: This review discusses emerging corticosteroid delivery platforms for DME treatment. A literature search of investigational novel therapeutic steroid delivery platform in DME was conducted. Results are presented from preclinical, phase 1,2 & 3 clinical trials of various drug delivery systems using new technologies such as Solubilizing Nanoparticle technology, Mucus Penetrating Particles technology and Particle Replication In Non-wetting Templates. These new platforms aim to deliver corticosteroids effectively via topical, episcleral, subtenon, oral, and intravitreal routes. EXPERT OPINION: These novel drug delivery platforms have the potential to lead to noninvasive or minimally invasive therapies and may overcome the shortcomings of current pharmacotherapy. However, larger comparative trials are needed for these agents to be added to the current armamentarium in DME management.

Multicolor imaging in macular telangiectasia-a comparison with fundus autofluorescence.

PURPOSE: To describe various clinical features of idiopathic juxtafoveal retinal telangiectasis group 2A or idiopathic macular telangiectasia type 2 (MacTel) on multicolor imaging (MCI) and compare imaging findings of MacTel on MCI with fundus autofluorescence (FAF). METHODS: Patients with a clinical diagnosis of MacTel based on Gass and Blodi's classification were included. FAF and MCI images were graded qualitatively for stage of disease, margins of involvement, hyperautofluorescence on FAF (corresponding retinal atrophy on MCI), and detection of crystals. FAF and MCI were graded quantitatively for the area and number of quadrants involved, hypoautofluorescene on FAF (corresponding intraretinal pigment hyperplasia or retinal pigment epithelium [RPE] atrophy on MCI), and foci of right-angled venules. RESULTS: Seventy-eight eyes of forty five patients were included with both imaging modalities showing no difference with respect to staging of non-proliferative MacTel. Retinal crystals were recognized on MCI but not on FAF. Neurosensory retinal atrophy and  subretinal neovascular membranes were detected using MCI with 92.3 and 83.3% sensitivity, respectively. Intraretinal pigmented hyperplasia was more accurately detected (70.1 vs 58.4%) compared with RPE atrophy on MCI. MCI showed larger area of involvement, higher number of quadrants involved (p < 0.001), and better delineation of margins (p = 0.002) compared with FAF. A higher mean number of vessel dipping foci was noted on MCI in comparison with FAF (3.34 vs 3.1). CONCLUSION: Various parameters were more easily defined using MCI compared with FAF which qualifies MCI as an enface depth-resolved imaging adjunct to conventional multimodal imaging in MacTel. The ability to detect enface as well as cross-sectional imaging features makes MCI a valuable tool in MacTel.

Prospective study of aflibercept for the treatment of persistent macular oedema secondary to retinal vein occlusions in eyes not responsive to long-term treatment with bevacizumab or ranibizumab.

IMPORTANCE: To examine the effect of switching from intravitreal bevacizumab or ranibizumab to aflibercept in eyes with persistent macular oedema due to retinal vein occlusion (RVO). BACKGROUND: We report the results of a prospective interventional study on the effect of aflibercept 2 mg in eyes with persistent macular oedema after long-term treatment with bevacizumab or ranibizumab. DESIGN: Non-randomized, prospective clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Eighteen eyes of eighteen patients were included. METHODS: Eyes with persistent macular oedema despite a minimum of four previous intravitreal bevacizumab/ranibizumab injections were recruited into this 48-week trial. Three loading doses of intravitreal aflibercept were administered every 4-weeks, thereafter every 8-weeks until week 48. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean change from baseline in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) as measured by early treatment diabetic retinopathy score (ETDRS) and central macular thickness (CMT) as measured by spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) at 48 weeks. RESULTS: Patients had received a mean of 40.0 ± 17.8 bevacizumab/ranibizumab intravitreal injections prior to switching to aflibercept. The mean number of previous injections administered in the 12-months preceding entry into the study was 10.2 ± 2.4. Mean vision change at week 48 was +21.1 ± 5.1 ETDRS letters in the BRVO group and +18.8 ± 5.9 letters at in the CRVO group (P < .001 for both groups). Mean decrease in CMT was 87.6 ± 48.8 µm and 191.0 ± 128.3 µm, in the BRVO and CRVO groups, respectively (P < .001). Using linear regression analyses, a higher number of previous intravitreal ranibizumab/bevacizumab injections and thicker pre-switch CMT were correlated with greater visual gains. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Switching to aflibercept from bevacizumab or ranibizumab in eyes with persistent macular oedema due to RVO can lead to functional and anatomical improvement. This effect was more obvious in eyes with a greater CMT prior to the switch.

Changes in real-world treatment patterns for diabetic macular oedema from 2009 to 2019 and 5-year outcomes: Data from the Fight Retinal Blindness! Registry.

IMPORTANCE: Evaluating the treatment outcomes of diabetic macular oedema (DMO) in routine clinical practice provides data for comparison with those of clinical trials. BACKGROUND: Phase 3 clinical trials of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors for DMO have reported significant improvements in visual acuity (VA) not previously reported with laser and steroid treatments. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of observational data from routine clinical practice. PARTICIPANTS: Eyes receiving treatments for DMO tracked in the Fight Retinal Blindness! Registry. METHODS: We analysed 510 eyes (347 patients) that started DMO treatment between 2009 and 2014. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in DMO treatment patterns and mean change in VA (letters logMAR) and central subfield thickness (CST) 5 years after starting treatment. RESULTS: Treatment choice for DMO changed to predominantly VEGF inhibitors from 2009 to 2014. A total of 238 eyes (47%) were followed for at least 5 years. The mean VA at the start of treatment improved from 2009 (58 letters) to 2014 (68 letters) while mean VA change at 5 years were + 4.5 and + 5.3 letters for eyes starting treatment in 2009 and 2014, respectively. The mean CST dropped from 401 µm at baseline to 314 µm at 5 years. Eyes received a median of four injections in the first, two in the second, third and fourth and three in the fifth years. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Changing the treatment of DMO from macular laser and intravitreal triamcinolone to VEGF inhibitors from 2011 onwards was associated with better VA outcomes, part of which were due to better VA at the start of treatment. The outcomes of treatment in eyes in real-world practice were, however, worse than those reported by clinical trials, likely because they were undertreated.

Projection of Long-Term Visual Acuity Outcomes Based on Initial Treatment Response in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration.

PURPOSE: To explore various methods for assessing the early response to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors for neovascular age-related macular degeneration and investigate their association with 3-year visual acuity (VA) outcomes. DESIGN: Database study, prospectively designed. PARTICIPANTS: Treatment-naïve eyes in the Fight Retinal Blindness! registry that commenced anti-VEGF therapy between January 1, 2007, and March 1, 2014, that received 3 anti-VEGF injections within the first 3 months. METHODS: The early response was defined as occurring up until the fourth injection. Various early response metrics were explored: (1) achieving good VA (≥70 letters; Snellen equivalent, 20/40), (2) absolute change in VA from baseline, (3) time to first grading of the choroidal neovascular lesion as inactive, and (4) maximum rate of VA change between successive injections. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of eyes achieving ≥70 letters 3 years. RESULTS: This study included 2051 treatment-naïve eyes from 1828 patients. Achieving good vision at 3 years was associated significantly with (1) having good vision by the fourth injection (VA ≥70 vs. VA <70 letters: odds ratio [OR], 9.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.5-14.7), (2) small (1-5 letters) or large (>5 letters) early VA gains (vs. early VA loss: OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.2-2.6; P = 0.002; and OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.3-2.5; P < 0.001), (3) fewer injections until first grading of lesion inactivity (≤3 vs. >3 injections: OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2-2.1; P < 0.001), (4) gradual change (between -4 and 4 letters) or rapid gains (≥5 letters) between successive injections (vs. rapid loss: OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1-2.6; P = 0.015; and OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.3; P = 0.018). Eyes that achieved small or large early gains had similar vision at 3 years (65.0 and 64.7 letters, respectively) and had better vision than eyes with early VA loss (57.2 letters). CONCLUSIONS: Attainment of good vision by the fourth injection was associated strongly with 3-year visual outcomes, whereas other early response parameters showed a moderate association. The early response during the initial 3 monthly injections can be a useful guide for subsequent treatment decisions.

DEXAMETHASONE IMPLANT FOR DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA IN NAIVE COMPARED WITH REFRACTORY EYES: The International Retina Group Real-Life 24-Month Multicenter Study. The IRGREL-DEX Study.

PURPOSE: To investigate efficacy and safety of repeated dexamethasone (DEX) implants over 24 months, in diabetic macular edema (DME) eyes that were treatment naive compared with eyes refractory to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment, in a real-life environment. METHODS: This multicenter international retrospective study assessed best-corrected visual acuity and central subfield thickness (CST) of naive and refractory eyes to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections treated with dexamethasone implants. Safety data (intraocular pressure rise and cataract surgery) were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 130 eyes from 125 patients were included. Baseline best-corrected visual acuity and CST were similar for naive (n = 71) and refractory eyes (n = 59). Both groups improved significantly in vision after 24 months (P < 0.001). However, naive eyes gained statistically significantly more vision than refractory eyes (+11.3 ± 10.0 vs. 7.3 ± 2.7 letters, P = 0.01) and were more likely to gain ≥10 letters (OR 3.31, 95% CI 1.19-9.24, P = 0.02). At 6, 12, and 24 months, CST was significantly decreased compared with baseline in both naive and refractory eyes; however, CST was higher in refractory eyes than in naive eyes (CST 279 ± 61 vs. 313 ± 125 µm, P = 0.10). CONCLUSION: Over a follow-up of 24 months, vision improved in diabetic macular edema eyes after treatment with dexamethasone implants, both in eyes that were treatment naive and eyes refractory to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment; however, improvement was greater in naive eyes.

Current Outcomes of Anti-VEGF Therapy in the Treatment of Macular Oedema Secondary to Branch Retinal Vein Occlusions: A Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: The current body of evidence on the efficacy and safety of anti-VEGFs for macular oedema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) is steadily growing as large clinical trials and observational studies are continually completed. The aim of this meta-analysis is to analyse anatomical and functional outcomes in response to anti-VEGF therapy using evidence generated from a pooled analysis of current clinical trials and observational studies. METHODS: The current meta-analysis includes treatment of BRVO with aflibercept, bevacizumab and ranibizumab from randomised controlled trials and observational studies. Inclusion criteria included peer-reviewed publications with at least a 12-month follow-up period. On literature review using multiple electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane), 22 studies met the inclusion criteria. Baseline patient characteristics, study design, sample size and 12- and 24-month change in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central foveal thickness (CFT) as measured on optical coherence tomography imaging were pooled in a meta-analysis. Data were then stratified by study design and anti-VEGF therapy in subgroup analyses. RESULTS: A total of 1,236 eyes from 22 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Mean baseline BCVA ranged from 66 ETDRS letters (20/50 Snellen equivalent) to 35 letters (20/200 Snellen). Mean baseline CFT ranged from 406.0 to 681.0 µm. Anti-VEGF treatment demonstrated an overall mean improvement in BCVA at 12 months of 14 letters (95% CI 12.0 to 16.2, p < 0.001) and CFT reduction of 228 µm (95% CI -278.9 to -176.1, p < 0.001). The BCVA gains at 12 months were maintained to month 24 with a mean gain of 12.5 letters (95% CI 6.3 to 18.8, p < 0.001), as well as reduction of CFT of 238 µm (95% CI -336.0 to -140.2, p < 0.001). No cases of endophthalmitis or glaucoma were reported in any study. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis confirms the comparable safety and efficacy of anti-VEGF therapies for patients with cystoid macular oedema secondary to BRVO. There is a need for randomised prospective comparative trials of anti-VEGF agents for BRVO.

Causative Pathogens of Endophthalmitis after Intravitreal Anti-VEGF Injection: An International Multicenter Study.

PURPOSE: The main objective of this study was to investigate the microbiological spectrum of endophthalmitis after anti-VEGF injections and to compare streptococcal with non-streptococcus-associated cases with regard to baseline characteristics and injection procedure. METHODS: Retrospective, international multicenter study of patients with culture-positive endophthalmitis after intravitreal anti-VEGF injection at 17 different retina referral centers. RESULTS: Eighty-three cases with 87 identified pathogens were included. Coagulase-negative staphylococci (59%) and viridans streptococci (15%) were the most frequent pathogens found. The use of postoperative antibiotics and performance of injections in an operating room setting significantly reduced the rate of streptococcus-induced endophthalmitis cases (p = 0.01 for both). CONCLUSION: We found a statistically significant lower rate of postinjectional local antibiotic therapy and operating room-based procedures among the streptococcus-induced cases compared to cases caused by other organisms.

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor combined with intravitreal steroids for diabetic macular oedema.

BACKGROUND: The combination of steroid and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) intravitreal therapeutic agents could potentially have synergistic effects for treating diabetic macular oedema (DMO). On the one hand, if combined treatment is more effective than monotherapy, there would be significant implications for improving patient outcomes. Conversely, if there is no added benefit of combination therapy, then people could be potentially exposed to unnecessary local or systemic side effects. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of intravitreal agents that block vascular endothelial growth factor activity (anti-VEGF agents) plus intravitreal steroids versus monotherapy with macular laser, intravitreal steroids or intravitreal anti-VEGF agents for managing DMO. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2018, Issue 1); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; LILACS; the ISRCTN registry; ClinicalTrials.gov and the ICTRP. The date of the search was 21 February 2018. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of intravitreal anti-VEGF combined with intravitreal steroids versus intravitreal anti-VEGF alone, intravitreal steroids alone or macular laser alone for managing DMO. We included people with DMO of all ages and both sexes. We also included trials where both eyes from one participant received different treatments. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane.Two authors independently reviewed all the titles and abstracts identified from the electronic and manual searches against the inclusion criteria. Our primary outcome was change in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) between baseline and one year. Secondary outcomes included change in central macular thickness (CMT), economic data and quality of life. We considered adverse effects including intraocular inflammation, raised intraocular pressure (IOP) and development of cataract. MAIN RESULTS: There were eight RCTs (703 participants, 817 eyes) that met our inclusion criteria with only three studies reporting outcomes at one year. The studies took place in Iran (3), USA (2), Brazil (1), Czech Republic (1) and South Korea (1). Seven studies used the unlicensed anti-VEGF agent bevacizumab and one study used licensed ranibizumab. The study that used licensed ranibizumab had a unique design compared with the other studies in that included eyes had persisting DMO after anti-VEGF monotherapy and received three monthly doses of ranibizumab prior to allocation. The anti-VEGF agent was combined with intravitreal triamcinolone in six studies and with an intravitreal dexamethasone implant in two studies. The comparator group was anti-VEGF alone in all studies; two studies had an additional steroid monotherapy arm, another study had an additional macular laser photocoagulation arm. Whilst we judged these studies to be at low risk of bias for most domains, at least one domain was at unclear risk in all studies.When comparing anti-VEGF/steroid with anti-VEGF monotherapy as primary therapy for DMO, we found no meaningful clinical difference in change in BCVA (mean difference (MD) -2.29 visual acuity (VA) letters, 95% confidence interval (CI) -6.03 to 1.45; 3 RCTs; 188 eyes; low-certainty evidence) or change in CMT (MD 0.20 µm, 95% CI -37.14 to 37.53; 3 RCTs; 188 eyes; low-certainty evidence) at one year. There was very low-certainty evidence on intraocular inflammation from 8 studies, with one event in the anti-VEGF/steroid group (313 eyes) and two events in the anti-VEGF group (322 eyes). There was a greater risk of raised IOP (Peto odds ratio (OR) 8.13, 95% CI 4.67 to 14.16; 635 eyes; 8 RCTs; moderate-certainty evidence) and development of cataract (Peto OR 7.49, 95% CI 2.87 to 19.60; 635 eyes; 8 RCTs; moderate-certainty evidence) in eyes receiving anti-VEGF/steroid compared with anti-VEGF monotherapy. There was low-certainty evidence from one study of an increased risk of systemic adverse events in the anti-VEGF/steroid group compared with the anti-VEGF alone group (Peto OR 1.32, 95% CI 0.61 to 2.86; 103 eyes).One study compared anti-VEGF/steroid versus macular laser therapy. At one year investigators did not report a meaningful difference between the groups in change in BCVA (MD 4.00 VA letters 95% CI -2.70 to 10.70; 80 eyes; low-certainty evidence) or change in CMT (MD -16.00 µm, 95% CI -68.93 to 36.93; 80 eyes; low-certainty evidence). There was very low-certainty evidence suggesting an increased risk of cataract in the anti-VEGF/steroid group compared with the macular laser group (Peto OR 4.58, 95% 0.99 to 21.10, 100 eyes) and an increased risk of elevated IOP in the anti-VEGF/steroid group compared with the macular laser group (Peto OR 9.49, 95% CI 2.86 to 31.51; 100 eyes).One study provided very low-certainty evidence comparing anti-VEGF/steroid versus steroid monotherapy at one year. There was no evidence of a meaningful difference in BCVA between treatments at one year (MD 0 VA letters, 95% CI -6.1 to 6.1, low-certainty evidence). Likewise, there was no meaningful difference in the mean CMT at one year (MD - 9 µm, 95% CI -39.87µm to 21.87µm between the anti-VEGF/steroid group and the steroid group. There was very low-certainty evidence on raised IOP at one year comparing the anti-VEGF/steroid versus steroid groups (Peto OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.16 to 3.55).No included study reported impact of treatment on patients' quality of life or economic data. None of the studies reported any cases of endophthalmitis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Combination of intravitreal anti-VEGF plus intravitreal steroids does not appear to offer additional visual benefit compared with monotherapy for DMO; at present the evidence for this is of low-certainty. There was an increased rate of cataract development and raised intraocular pressure in eyes treated with anti-VEGF plus steroid versus anti-VEGF alone. Patients were exposed to potential side effects of both these agents without reported additional benefit. The majority of the evidence comes from studies of bevacizumab and triamcinolone used as primary therapy for DMO. There is limited evidence from studies using licensed intravitreal anti-VEGF agents plus licensed intravitreal steroid implants with at least one year follow-up. It is not known whether treatment response is different in eyes that are phakic and pseudophakic at baseline.

The Use of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Inhibitors and Complementary Treatment Options in Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy: A Subtype of Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration.

Polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV) is a subtype of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD; nAMD) which occurs more commonly in Asian populations as compared to Caucasians. PCV and nAMD share pathological mechanisms, including pathological expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). The advent of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) revolutionized the treatment of nAMD. Despite being a subtype of nAMD, PCV responds less well to VEGF inhibitors; thus, photodynamic therapy (PDT) in combination with anti-VEGF treatment may be considered. This review aims to summarize the current evidence for the treatment of PCV, especially whether VEGF inhibitors should be used alone or in combination with PDT.

Hypertensive eye disease: a review.

Hypertension is a risk factor for a number of vision-threatening eye conditions including retinal vascular occlusion, retinal macroaneurysm and non arteritic anterior ischaemic optic neuropathy. In addition, hypertension may exacerbate the vision-threatening effects of diabetic retinopathy and has been implicated in the pathogenesis of age-related macular degeneration. The effects of sustained hypertension are directly visible in the eye as hypertensive retinopathy and choroidopathy, reflecting a pathological process occurring throughout the body. Close collaboration between ophthalmologists and general practitioners/physicians is needed to ensure that hypertensive patients are identified and treated. Timely intervention in these patients may reduce the risk of both vision-threatening and systemic complications.

Combination of vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors and laser therapy for diabetic macular oedema: a review.

This review provides a perspective on published and ongoing clinical trials of vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors (anti-VEGF agents) combined with laser therapy for diabetic macular oedema (DMO). Although there was little short-term benefit in combining prompt macular laser with anti-VEGF therapy for centre-involving DMO in the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network (DRCRnet) Protocol I study, deferred macular laser was still required in over 40% of study eyes in DRCRnet Protocol T. Macular laser was applied in more than 30% of eyes with centre-involving DMO receiving ranibizumab in the RISE and RIDE studies. For non centre-involving DMO the evidence-base still supports use of focal macular laser alone, although clinicians should be cautious about applying laser too close to the foveal avascular zone with the availability of pharmacotherapy. Ongoing clinical trials are assessing whether selectively targeting areas of peripheral retinal ischaemia with laser reduces the number of anti-VEGF injections to stabilise DMO and whether combining macular micropulse laser with anti-VEGF therapy is beneficial in DMO.