Aflibercept in clinical practice; visual acuity, injection numbers and adherence to treatment, for diabetic macular oedema in 21 UK hospitals over 3 years.

INTRODUCTION: Randomised controlled trials provide evidence that a treatment works. Real world evidence is required to assess if proven treatments are effective in practice. METHOD: Retrospective data collection on patients given aflibercept for diabetic macular oedema over 3 years from 21 UK hospitals: visual acuity (VA); Index of multiple deprivation score (IMD); injection numbers; protocols used, compared as a cohort and between sites. RESULTS: Complete data: 1742 patients (from 2196 eligible) at 1 year, 860 (from 1270) at 2, 305 (from 506) at 3 years. The median VA improved from 65 to 71, 70, 70 (ETDRS letters) at 1, 2 and 3 years with 6, 9 and 12 injections, respectively. Loss to follow-up: 10% 1 year, 28.8% at 3. Centres varied: baseline: mean age 61-71 years (p < 0.0001); mean IMD score 15-37 (p < 0.0001); mean VA 49-68 (p < 0.0001). Only four centres provided a loading course of five injections at monthly intervals and one 6. This did not alter VA outcome at 1 year. Higher IMD was associated with younger age (p = 0.0023) and worse VA at baseline (p < 0.0001) not total number of injections or change in VA. Lower starting VA, higher IMD and older age were associated with lower adherence (p = 0.0010). CONCLUSIONS: The data showed significant variation between treatment centres for starting age, VA and IMD which influenced adherence and chances of good VA. Once treatment was started IMD did not alter likelihood of improvement. Loading dose intensity did not alter outcome at one year.

Trends in diabetic retinopathy screening attendance and associations with vision impairment attributable to diabetes in a large nationwide cohort.

AIMS: To investigate diabetic retinopathy screening attendance and trends in certified vision impairment caused by diabetic eye disease. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of attendance in three urban UK diabetic eye screening programmes in England. A survival analysis was performed to investigate time from diagnosis to first screen by age and sex. Logistic regression analysis of factors influencing screening attendance during a 15-month reporting period was conducted, as well as analysis of new vision impairment certifications (Certificate of Vision Impairment) in England and Wales from 2009 to 2019. RESULTS: Of those newly registered in the Routine Digital Screening pathway (n = 97 048), 80% attended screening within the first 12 months and 88% by 36 months. Time from registration to first eye screening was longer for people aged 18-34 years, and 20% were unscreened after 3 years. Delay in first screen was associated with increased risk of referable retinopathy. Although 95% of participants (n = 291 296) attended during the 15-month reporting period, uptake varied considerably. Younger age, social deprivation, ethnicity and duration of diabetes were independent predictors of non-attendance and referable retinopathy. Although the last 10 years has seen an overall reduction in vision impairment certification attributable to diabetic eye disease, the incidence of vision impairment in those aged <35 years was unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst the majority of participants are screened in a timely manner, there is considerable variation in uptake. Young adults, have sub-optimal attendance, and levels of vision impairment in this population have not changed over the last 10 years. There is an urgent need to explore barriers to/enablers of attendance in this group to inform policy initiatives and tailored interventions to address this issue.

Utility of HbA1c assessment in people with diabetes awaiting liver transplantation.

AIMS: To investigate the relationship between HbA1c and glucose in people with co-existing liver disease and diabetes awaiting transplant, and in those with diabetes but no liver disease. METHODS: HbA1c and random plasma glucose data were collected for 125 people with diabetes without liver disease and for 29 people awaiting liver transplant with diabetes and cirrhosis. Cirrhosis was caused by non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, hepatitis C, alcoholic liver disease, hereditary haemochromatosis, polycystic liver/kidneys, cryptogenic/non-cirrhotic portal hypertension and α-1-antitrypsin-related disease. RESULTS: The median (interquartile range) age of the diabetes with cirrhosis group was 55 (49-63) years compared to 60 (50-71) years (P=0.13) in the group without cirrhosis. In the diabetes with cirrhosis group there were 21 men (72%) compared with 86 men (69%) in the group with diabetes and no cirrhosis (P=0.82). Of the group with diabetes and cirrhosis, 27 people (93%) were of white European ethnicity, two (7%) were South Asian and none was of Afro-Caribbean/other ethnicity compared with 94 (75%), 16 (13%), 10 (8%)/5 (4%), respectively, in the group with diabetes and no cirrhosis (P=0.20). Median (interquartile range) HbA1c was 41 (32-56) mmol/mol [5.9 (5.1-7.3)%] vs 61 (52-70) mmol/mol [7.7 (6.9-8.6)%] (P<0.001), respectively, in the diabetes with cirrhosis group vs the diabetes without cirrhosis group. The glucose concentrations were 8.4 (7.0-11.2) mmol/l vs 7.3 (5.2-11.5) mmol/l (P=0.17). HbA1c was depressed by 20 mmol/mol (1.8%; P<0.001) in 28 participants with cirrhosis but elevated by 28 mmol/mol (2.6%) in the participant with α-1-antitrypsin disorder. Those with cirrhosis and depressed HbA1c had fewer larger erythrocytes, and higher red cell distribution width and reticulocyte count. This was reflected in the positive association of glucose with mean cell volume (r=0.39) and haemoglobin level (r=0.49) and the negative association for HbA1c (r=-0.28 and r=-0.26, respectively) in the diabetes group with cirrhosis. CONCLUSION: HbA1c is not an appropriate test for blood glucose in people with cirrhosis and diabetes awaiting transplant as it reflects altered erythrocyte presentation.

Factors determining uptake of diabetic retinopathy screening in Oxfordshire.

AIMS: To investigate variables at the demographic and primary care practice levels that influence the uptake of diabetic retinopathy screening. METHODS: Data were extracted from the management software of one screening programme for 21 797 people registered with 79 general practices. Uptake was examined by gender, age group, modality of screening (mobile unit at general practice versus high-street optometrist), and by general practice. A telephone survey of high-street optometrists provided information on the availability of screening appointments. RESULTS: Uptake was 82.4% during the study period, and was higher for men (83.2%) than for women (81.5%) (P = 0.001). Uptake varied by age group (P < 0.001), being lowest in those aged 12-39 years (67%). Uptake was higher for people invited to a general practice for screening by a mobile unit (83.5%) than for those invited for screening by a high-street optometrist (82%) (P = 0.006). After adjusting for these factors and for socio-economic deprivation score at the location of the general practice, heterogeneity in uptake rate was still observed between some practices. Our survey of optometrists indicated wide variation in the availability of time slots for screening during the week and of screening appointment provision. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetic retinopathy screening services do not achieve high uptake among the youngest or oldest age groups. Practices in the least deprived areas had the highest uptake. Variation in uptake between general practices after adjustment for individual-level variables and deprivation suggests that practice-level factors may have an important role in determining rates of screening attendance.

Risk of diabetic retinopathy at first screen in children at 12 and 13 years of age.

AIMS: To investigate the relationships between age at diagnosis of diabetes, age at diabetic eye screening and severity of diabetic retinopathy at first and subsequent screenings in children aged 12 or 13 years. METHODS: Data were extracted from four English screening programmes and from the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish programmes on all children with diabetes invited for their first and subsequent screening episodes from the age of 12 years. Retinopathy levels at first and subsequent screens, time from diagnosis of diabetes to first screening and age at diagnosis in years were calculated. RESULTS: Data were available for 2125 children with diabetes screened for the first time at age 12 or 13 years. In those diagnosed with diabetes at 2 years of age or less, the proportion with retinopathy in one or both eyes was 20% and 11%, respectively, decreasing to 8% and 2% in those diagnosed between 2 and 12 years (P < 0.0001). Only three children (aged 8, 10 and 11 years at diagnosis of diabetes) had images graded with referable retinopathy and, of these, two had non-referable diabetic retinopathy at all subsequent screenings. Of 1703 children with subsequent images, 25 were graded with referable diabetic retinopathy over a mean follow-up of 3.1 years, an incidence rate of 4.7 (95% confidence interval, 3.1-7.0) per 1000 per year. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of children, the low prevalence and incidence rates of referable diabetic retinopathy suggest that screening earlier than age 12 is not necessary.

Development and validation of a Diabetes Risk Score for screening undiagnosed diabetes in Sri Lanka (SLDRISK).

BACKGROUND: Screening for undiagnosed diabetes is not widely undertaken due to the high costs and invasiveness of blood sampling. Simple non-invasive tools to identify high risk individuals can facilitate screening. The main objectives of this study are to develop and validate a risk score for screening undiagnosed diabetes among Sri Lankan adults and to compare its performance with the Cambridge Risk Score (CRS), the Indian Diabetes Risk Score (IDRS) and three other Asian risk scores. METHODS: Data were available from a representative sample of 4276 adults without diagnosed diabetes. In a jack-knife approach two thirds of the sample was used for the development of the risk score and the remainder for the validation. Age, waist circumference, BMI, hypertension, balanitis or vulvitis, family history of diabetes, gestational diabetes, physical activity and osmotic symptoms were significantly associated with undiagnosed diabetes (age most to osmotic symptoms least). Individual scores were generated for these factors using the beta coefficient values obtained in multiple logistic regression. A cut-off value of sum = 31 was determined by ROC curve analysis. RESULTS: The area under the ROC curve of the risk score for prevalent diabetes was 0.78 (CI 0.73-0.82). In the sample 36.3 % were above the cut-off of 31. A risk score above 31 gave a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of 77.9, 65.6, 9.4 and 98.3 % respectively. For Sri Lankans the AUC for the CRS and IDRS were 0.72 and 0.66 repectively. CONCLUSIONS: This simple non-invasive screening tool can identify 80 % of undiagnosed diabetes by selecting 40 % of Sri Lankan adults for confirmatory blood investigations.

The UK Neovascular AMD Database Report 3: inter-centre variation in visual acuity outcomes and establishing real-world measures of care.

PurposeInternational variations in visual acuity (VA) outcomes of eyes treated for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) are well-documented, but intra-country inter-centre regional variations are not known. These data are important for national quality outcome indicators. We aimed to determine intra-country and inter-centre regional variations in outcomes for treatment of nAMD.Patients and methodsProspective multicentre national database study of 13 UK centres that treated patients according to a set protocol (three loading doses, followed by Pro-Re-Nata retreatment). A total of 5811 treatment naive eyes of 5205 patients received a total of 36 206 ranibizumab injections over 12 months.ResultsMean starting VA between centres varied from 48.9 to 59.9 ETDRS letters. Mean inter-centre VA change from baseline to 12 months varied from +6.9 letters to -0.6 letters (mean of +2.5 letters). The proportion of eyes achieving VA of 70 letters or more varied between 21.9 and 48.7% at 12 months. Median number of injections (visits) at each centre varied from 5 to 8 (9 to 12), with an overall median of 6 (11). Age, starting VA, number of injections, and visits, but not gender were significantly associated with variation in these VA outcomes (P<0.01). Significant variation between centres persisted even after adjusting for these factors.ConclusionThere are modest differences in VA outcomes between centres in the UK. These differences are influenced, but not completely explained, by factors such as patient age, starting VA, number of injections, and visits. These data provide an indication of the VA outcomes that are achievable in real-world settings.

System-level and patient-level explanations for non-attendance at diabetic retinopathy screening in Sutton and Merton (London, UK): a qualitative analysis of a service evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: Non-attendance at diabetic retinopathy screening has financial implications for screening programmes and potential clinical costs to patients. We sought to identify explanations for why patients had never attended a screening appointment (never attendance) in one programme. DESIGN: Qualitative analysis of a service evaluation. SETTING: One South London (UK) diabetic eye screening programme. PARTICIPANTS AND PROCEDURE: Patients who had been registered with one screening programme for at least 18 months and who had never attended screening within the programme were contacted by telephone to ascertain why this was the case. Patients' general practices were also contacted for information about why each patient may not have attended. Framework analysis was used to interpret responses. RESULTS: Of the 296 patients, 38 were not eligible for screening and of the 258 eligible patients, 159 were not contactable (31 of these had phone numbers that were not in use). We obtained reasons from patients/general practices/clinical notes for non-attendance for 146 (57%) patients. A number of patient-level and system-level factors were given to explain non-attendance. Patient-level factors included having other commitments, being anxious about screening, not engaging with any diabetes care and being misinformed about screening. System-level factors included miscommunication about where the patient lives, their clinical situation and practical problems that could have been overcome had their existence been shared between programmes. CONCLUSIONS: This service evaluation provides unique insight into the patient-level and system-level reasons for never attendance at diabetic retinopathy screening. Improved sharing of relevant information between providers has the potential to facilitate increased uptake of screening. Greater awareness of patient-level barriers may help providers offer a more accessible service.

The use of statistical methodology to determine the accuracy of grading within a diabetic retinopathy screening programme.

AIMS: We aimed to use longitudinal data from an established screening programme with good quality assurance and quality control procedures and a stable well-trained workforce to determine the accuracy of grading in diabetic retinopathy screening. METHODS: We used a continuous time-hidden Markov model with five states to estimate the probability of true progression or regression of retinopathy and the conditional probability of an observed grade given the true grade (misclassification). The true stage of retinopathy was modelled as a function of the duration of diabetes and HbA1c . RESULTS: The modelling dataset consisted of 65 839 grades from 14 187 people. The median number [interquartile range (IQR)] of examinations was 5 (3, 6) and the median (IQR) interval between examinations was 1.04 (0.99, 1.17) years. In total, 14 227 grades (21.6%) were estimated as being misclassified, 10 592 (16.1%) represented over-grading and 3635 (5.5%) represented under-grading. There were 1935 (2.9%) misclassified referrals, 1305 were false-positive results (2.2%) and 630 were false-negative results (1.0%). Misclassification of background diabetic retinopathy as no detectable retinopathy was common (3.4% of all grades) but rarely preceded referable maculopathy or retinopathy. CONCLUSION: Misclassification between lower grades of retinopathy is not uncommon but is unlikely to lead to significant delays in referring people for sight-threatening retinopathy.

Screening attendance, age group and diabetic retinopathy level at first screen.

AIMS: To report on the relationships between age at diagnosis of diabetes, time from registration with the screening programme to first diabetic eye screening and severity of diabetic retinopathy. METHODS: Data were extracted from four English screening programmes and from the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish programmes. Time from diagnosis of diabetes to first screening and age at diagnosis were calculated. RESULTS: Time from registration with the screening programme to first screening episode is strongly related to age at registration. Within 18 months of registration 89% of 3958 young people under 18 years of age and 81% of 391 293 people over 35 years of age were seen. In 19 058 people between 18 and 34 years of age, 80% coverage was not reached until 2 years and 9 months. The time from diagnosis of diabetes to first screening is positively associated with severity of disease (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: This report is the first that to demonstrate that those in the 18-34 year age group are least likely to attend promptly for screening after registration with a higher risk of referable diabetic retinopathy being present at the time of first screen. Date of diagnosis should be recorded and prodigious efforts made to screen all people promptly after diagnosis. Screening programmes should collect data on those who have not attended within one year of registration.

Prevalence and incidence of blindness and other degrees of sight impairment in patients treated for neovascular age-related macular degeneration in a well-defined region of the United Kingdom.

AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate the incidence and prevalence of blindness, sight impairment, and other visual acuity (VA) states in patients receiving ranibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) in Gloucestershire. METHODS: Serial VA and injection data for all treatment-naive patients receiving their first intravitreal injections of ranibizumab for nAMD in the Gloucestershire National Health Service Ophthalmology department between 2008 and 2010 were extracted from an electronic medical record system. RESULTS: The prevalence of blindness (VA in the better-seeing eye ≤25 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters) at the time of first intravitreal injection was 0.8%, increasing to 3.5% after 3 years. The prevalence of sight impairment (VA in the better-seeing eye 26-39 ETDRS letters) increased from 4.1% at baseline to 5.5% after 3 years. The incidence of initiating ranibizumab treatment for nAMD in people aged ≥50 years in Gloucestershire was 111 people per 100 000 population in 2009, and 97 people in 2010. The incidence of patients meeting the visual criteria for blindness and sight impairment registration from treated nAMD in people aged ≥50 years in Gloucestershire was 3.5 and 9.7 people, respectively per 100 000 population in 2010. CONCLUSION: This is the first real-world study on the incidence and prevalence of eligibility for blindness and sight impairment registration in treated nAMD in the UK based on VA data. The incidence and prevalence of eligibility for certification of blindness or sight impairment in patients treated with ranibizumab for nAMD is low in Gloucestershire, with only 3.6% of the incident population progressing to blindness in 2010.

The use of weighted health-related Quality of Life scores in people with diabetic macular oedema at baseline in a randomized clinical trial.

AIMS: To examine the relationship between visual acuity in each eye and Quality of Life (QoL) outcomes in people with diabetic macular oedema. METHODS: Cross sectional retrospective analysis of data collected at baseline in 289 people entered into a randomized clinical trial with diabetic macular oedema which investigated the safety and efficacy of a vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor, pegaptanib sodium. At the baseline visit, visual acuity was measured through refraction and using retro-illuminated modified Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study Log MAR charts, and patient health-related QoL was determined using the European Quality of Life EQ-5D-3L and the Visual Functioning Questionnaire-25 (NEI-VFQ25). A regression analysis with QoL score from each vision-related domain as the dependent variable was fitted using linear and quadratic terms of the better and worse eye, age, gender, adjusted for number of concurrent conditions, ethnicity and level of diabetes control. RESULTS: For all vision-related QoL domains from NEI-VFQ25 and EQ-5D-3L except ocular pain, both visual acuity in the better-seeing and the worse-seeing eye gave a significant increase in correlation coefficient over that obtained from clinical and demographic data. The NEI-VFQ25 correlation was most closely associated with a weighted visual acuity measure of 0.75 in the better and 0.25 in the worse eye or 0.60 in the better and 0.40 in the worse eye. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend that a weighted visual acuity measure from both eyes is considered in future diabetic macular oedema trials.

Attitudes, access and anguish: a qualitative interview study of staff and patients' experiences of diabetic retinopathy screening.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the experiences of patients, health professionals and screeners; their interactions with and understandings of diabetic retinopathy screening (DRS); and how these influence uptake. DESIGN: Purposive, qualitative design using multiperspectival, semistructured interviews and thematic analysis. SETTING: Three UK Screening Programme regions with different service-delivery modes, minority ethnic and deprivation levels across rural, urban and inner-city areas, in general practitioner practices and patients' homes. PARTICIPANTS: 62 including 38 patients (22 regular-screening attenders, 16 non-regular attenders) and 24 professionals (15 primary care professionals and 9 screeners). RESULTS: Antecedents to attendance included knowledge about diabetic retinopathy and screening; antecedents to non-attendance included psychological, pragmatic and social factors. Confusion between photographs taken at routine eye tests and DRS photographs was identified. The differing regional invitation methods and screening locations were discussed, with convenience and transport safety being over-riding considerations for patients. Some patients mentioned significant pain and visual disturbance from mydriasis drops as a deterrent to attendance. CONCLUSIONS: In this, the first study to consider multiperspectival experiential accounts, we identified that proactive coordination of care involving patients, primary care and screening programmes, prior to, during and after screening is required. Multiple factors, prior to, during and after screening, are involved in the attendance and non-attendance for DRS. Further research is needed to establish whether patient self-management educational interventions and the pharmacological reformulation of shorter acting mydriasis drops, may improve uptake of DRS. This might, in turn, reduce preventable vision loss and its associated costs to individuals and their families, and to health and social care providers, reducing current inequalities.

Delay in diabetic retinopathy screening increases the rate of detection of referable diabetic retinopathy.

AIMS: To assess whether there is a relationship between delay in retinopathy screening after diagnosis of type 2 diabetes and level of retinopathy detected. METHODS: Patients were referred from 88 primary care practices to an English National Health Service diabetic eye screening programme. Data for screened patients were extracted from the primary care databases using semi-automated data collection algorithms supplemented by validation processes. The programme uses two-field mydriatic digital photographs graded by a quality assured team. RESULTS: Data were available for 8183 screened patients with diabetes newly diagnosed in 2005, 2006 or 2007. Only 163 with type 1 diabetes were identified and were insufficient for analysis. Data were available for 8020 with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes. Of these, 3569 were screened within 6 months, 2361 between 6 and 11 months, 1058 between 12 and 17 months, 366 between 18 and 23 months, 428 between 24 and 35 months, and 238 at 3 years or more after diagnosis. There were 5416 (67.5%) graded with no retinopathy, 1629 (20.3%) with background retinopathy in one eye, 753 (9.4%) with background retinopathy in both eyes and 222 (2.8%) had referable diabetic retinopathy. There was a significant trend (P = 0.0004) relating time from diagnosis to screening detecting worsening retinopathy. Of those screened within 6 months of diagnosis, 2.3% had referable retinopathy and, 3 years or more after diagnosis, 4.2% had referable retinopathy. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of detection of referable diabetic retinopathy is elevated in those who were not screened promptly after diagnosis of type 2 diabetes.

United Kingdom National Ophthalmology Database Study: Diabetic Retinopathy; Report 1: prevalence of centre-involving diabetic macular oedema and other grades of maculopathy and retinopathy in hospital eye services.

AIMS: To report estimates of the prevalence of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and maculopathy grades for a large cohort of patients managed by the UK hospital eye service (HES). METHODS: Anonymised data were extracted from 30 UK NHS hospital trusts using a single ophthalmic electronic medical record (EMR) for the period from April 2000 to November 2010 to create the National Ophthalmology Database (NOD). From 2007, the EMR facilitated capture of a nationally agreed-upon standardised data set (DR Structured Assessment) relating to the presence or absence of clinical signs of DR and maculopathy. An algorithm in the software automatically calculated the Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study grades of retinopathy and maculopathy. RESULTS: Between 2007 and 2010, 307,538 patients had data on the NOD, with 76,127 (24.8%) patients having been recorded as having diabetes. The proportion of patients with diabetes who had a structured assessment increased from 50.7% (2007) to 86.8% (2010). In each NHS year, 12.6-20.6% of eyes with structured assessments had no DR; 59.6-67.3% had non-proliferative DR; and 18.3-20.9% had active or regressed proliferative DR. Clinically significant macular oedema was present in 15.8-18.1% of eyes, and in 8.7-10.0% of eyes, this involved the central macula. CONCLUSION: This study provides contemporary estimates of the prevalence of retinopathy and maculopathy grades in a large cohort of patients with diabetes managed by the UK HES. Centre-involving diabetic macular oedema, potentially amenable to anti-VEGF therapy, is present in the eyes of almost 10% of these patients. This information is useful for clinicians, health-care economists, and commissioners involved in planning and delivering diabetic eye services.

Updating diabetic retinopathy screening lists using automatic extraction from GP patient records.

OBJECTIVES: Diabetic Retinopathy screening services aim to reduce the risk of sight loss amongst patients with diabetes. The rising incidence of diabetes in England and the operational need to ensure the accuracy and timeliness of screening lists led to a pilot study of electronic extraction of data from primary care. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of updating the single collated list of patients eligible for diabetic eye screening using extracts from electronic patient records in primary care. SETTING AND METHODS: The Gloucestershire Diabetic Eye Screening Programme (GDESP) provides screening for 85 General Practices in the county. Of these, 54 using Egton Medical Information Systems (EMIS) practice management system software agreed to participate in this study. The screening list held in 2009 by the Gloucestershire DESP of 14,209 patients known to have diabetes was audited against a list created with automatic extraction from General Practice records of patients marked with the diabetes Read Code C10. Those subsequently screened and referred to the Hospital Eye service were followed up. RESULTS: The Gloucestershire DESP manual list covering the 54 EMIS practices comprised 14,771 people with diabetes. The audit process identified an additional 709 (4.8%) patients coded C10, including 23 diagnosed more than 5 years ago, and 20 patients under the age of 20 who were diagnosed more than a year ago. CONCLUSION: Automatic extraction of data from General Practice identified 709 patients coded as having diabetes not previously known to the Gloucestershire DESP.

Which visual acuity measurements define high-quality care for patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration treated with ranibizumab?

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to define which visual acuity (VA) measurements are the best indicators of high-quality care for patients receiving intravitreal ranibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). METHODS: Analysis of prospectively collected data recorded within an electronic medical record system on treatment-naive, first-eligible eyes with nAMD, treated with ranibizumab using an as-needed treatment regimen with a minimum follow-up of 1 year. Data collection included the following: age, gender, laterality, type of nAMD, VA, central 1 mm OCT retinal thickness, number of intravitreal injections, and number of follow-up assessments. RESULTS: Data were available on the first-treated eye from 406 patients with at least 1 year follow-up; of these, 198 had data at 2 years. The mean baseline VA of 54.4 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters improved to 58.5 letters at 12 months and to 56.8 letters at 24 months. The mean VA changes from baseline to 1 year were +6.5, +7.5, +1.7, and -1.5 letters, respectively, for baseline VA categories of 23-35, 36-55, 56-70, and >70 letters. Change in mean VA from the end of the loading phase to year 1 ranged from -2.9 to +1.4 letters for the different baseline VA categories. The mean number of injections were similar across baseline VA categories ranging from 5.7 to 6.0 injections in year 1 and from 3.3 to 3.8 in year 2. CONCLUSIONS: This large, real-world series demonstrates that mean change in VA is largely a function of selection criteria and baseline VA. The quality of a service is therefore better judged by actual VA outcomes and maintenance of vision after the loading phase.

A potential pathway for managing diabetic patients with arterial emboli detected by retinal screening.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to review a pathway of care for diabetic patients found to have retinal artery emboli detected by retinal screening. DESIGN: This was a retrospective review of a pathway agreed in 2001 by a multidisciplinary team. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The prospectively collected Gloucestershire Diabetic Retinal Screening Programme database was reviewed; patients sent for carotid duplex imaging underwent review of their scan results and their casenotes. RESULTS: The prevalence of retinal emboli was 214 out of 25,299 diabetic patients who had retinal screening (0.85%). Some 200 diabetic patients underwent carotid duplex imaging; 23 had ipsilateral and 2 had contralateral carotid stenosis > 70%. Of these, ten patients underwent carotid endarterectomy without any major morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: [corrected] A pathway was established for the small number of patients with retinal emboli, and could be tested in other populations.