Predictive Factors and Management of Macular Edema after Retropupillary Iris-Claw Intraocular Lens Implantation in Aphakia: National Multicenter Audit-Report 2.

The aim of this multicenter, national clinical audit is to evaluate the predictive factors and management of postoperative macular edema (ME) after retropupillary iris-claw intraocular lens (RICI) implantation and pars plana vitrectomy (PPV). Preoperative, surgical and postoperative data were collected. Number and type of intravitreal injections (IT) administered (anti-VEGF or dexamethasone implant), visual acuity (VA), intraocular pressure (IOP) and central retinal thickness (CRT) assessed by OCT were collected at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. From 325 eyes (325 patients), 11.7% (38/325) developed postoperative ME. Previous complicated cataract surgery with no capsular support was the only significant predictive factor for developing postoperative ME (OR 2.27, 95% CI 1.38-4.52, p = 0.02) after RICI implant. Mean time to ME development was 11.4 ± 10.7 weeks, and mean CRT peaked at 3 months follow-up. Different treatment options were non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAIDs) drops (31.6%, 12/38), dexamethasone (DEX) implant (50%, 19/38), anti-VEGF (7.9%, 3/38) or combined IT (10.5%, 4/38). Cumulative probability of ME resolution was higher in the group treated with IT than in the group treated with topical NSAIDs (85.2% vs. 58.3%, p = 0.9). Performing RICI implantation after complicated cataract surgery is a risk factor for the development of postoperative ME. DEX implants may be an effective treatment for postoperative ME in these cases.

Wickerhamomyces Anomalus Postoperative Endophthalmitis.

INTRODUCTION: We describe the case of a postoperative fungal endophthalmitis caused by Wickerhamomyces anomalus, an opportunistic yeast common in nature but rare as a causative agent in ocular infections. This would be the second reported case of W. anomalus endophthalmitis. CASE REPORT: A patient came to our hospital with a dense hemovitreous caused by an inadvertent ocular perforation and retinal detachment during a cataract surgery. In the days following the first vitreoretinal surgery a chronic postoperative endophthalmitis was evidenced. Only after several surgeries as well as intravitreal antibiotics and sample takings, Wickerhamomyces was detected. The treatment with oral voriconazole and an intraocular lens extraction controlled the infection. DISCUSSION: Wickerhamomyces anomalus, despite not being particularly aggressive in our case, was resistant to various consequent vitreoretinal surgeries. The unresponsiveness to treatment led us to contemplate the fungal etiology, and fortunately the cultures were positive for this yeast. In conjunction to antifungal therapy, it is possible that the IOL explantation played an important role in the treatment. CONCLUSION: A high index of suspicion must be held in cases of fungal endophthalmitis. Both IOL explantation and oral antifungal therapy are useful treatment options in cases of W. anomalus endophthalmitis.

Challenges in Diabetic Macular Edema Management: An Expert Consensus Report.

PURPOSE: This paper aimed to present daily-practice recommendations for the management of diabetic macular edema (DME) patients based on available scientific evidence and the clinical experience of the consensus panel. METHODS: A group of Spanish retina experts agreed to discuss different aspects related with the clinical management of DME patients. RESULTS: Panel was mainly focused on therapeutic objectives in DME management; definition terms; and role of biomarkers as prognostic and predictive factors to intravitreal treatment response. The panel recommends to start DME treatment as soon as possible in those eyes with a visual acuity less than 20/25 (always according to the retina unit capacity). Naïve patient was defined, in a strict manner, as a patient who, up to that moment, had never received any treatment. A refractory DME patient may be defined as the one who did not achieve a complete resolution of the disease, regardless of the treatment administered. Different optical coherence tomography biomarkers, such as disorganization of the retinal inner layers, hyperreflective dots, and cysts, have been identified as prognostic factors. CONCLUSION: This document has sought to lay down a set of recommendations and to identify key issues that may be useful for the daily management of DME patients.

RETROPUPILLARY IRIS-CLAW INTRAOCULAR LENS AND PARS PLANA VITRECTOMY IN APHAKIA MANAGEMENT: A National Multicenter Audit.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcomes and safety of retropupillary iris-claw intraocular lens implantation and associated pars plana vitrectomy. METHODS: Multicenter, national audit of 325 eyes (325 patients). Demographics, surgical details, and complications are described. Visual acuity, intraocular pressure, and central retinal thickness assessed by optical coherence tomography were collected at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Kaplan-Meier curves were created to assess the cumulative probability of postoperative visual acuity and intraocular pressure levels, macular edema development, and corneal decompensation. RESULTS: The cumulative probability of the final visual acuity ≤0.3 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (≥20/40 Snellen) was 75.6% at 12-month follow-up. The probability of intraocular pressure >21, ≥25, and ≥30 mmHg was 48.1%, 33.1%, and 19.0%, and the probability of intraocular pressure-lowering drops was 50.9% at 12 months. Glaucoma surgery was required in 4.3% of the eyes (14/325). The cumulative probability of macular edema was 20.5% at 12 months and was greater in complicated cataract surgery than in intraocular lens-luxation eyes (26% vs. 16.7%, P = 0.04). Corneal transplantation was required in 2.8% of the eyes (9/325). CONCLUSION: This study on 325 eyes with aphakia or intraocular lens dislocation managed with the retropupillary iris-claw intraocular lens technique provides clinical outcomes in a real-world scenario, reporting relevant data for patient counseling and preoperative discussions.

A Multiple Stakeholder Multicriteria Decision Analysis in Diabetic Macular Edema Management: The MULTIDEX-EMD Study.

BACKGROUND: The clinical and economic management of retinal diseases has become more complex following the introduction of new intravitreal treatments. Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) offers the potential to overcome the challenges associated with traditional decision-making tools. OBJECTIVES: A MCDA to determine the most relevant criteria to decision-making in the management of diabetic macular edema (DME) based on the perspectives of multiple stakeholders in Spain was developed. This MCDA was termed the MULTIDEX-EMD study. METHODS: Nineteen stakeholders (7 physicians, 4 pharmacists, 5 health authorities and health management experts, 1 psychologist, and 2 patient representatives) participated in this three-phase project. In phase A, an advisory board defined all of the criteria that could influence DME treatment decision-making. These criteria were then screened using a discrete choice experiment (DCE) (phase B). Next, a multinomial logit model was fitted by applying the backward elimination algorithm (relevant criteria: p value < 0.05). Finally, the results were discussed in a deliberative process (phase C). RESULTS: Thirty-one criteria were initially defined (phase A) and grouped into 5 categories: efficacy/effectiveness, safety, organizational and economic impact, patient-reported outcomes, and other therapeutic features. The DCE results (phase B) showed that 10 criteria were relevant to the decision-making process for a 50- to 65-year-old DME patient: mean change in best corrected visual acuity (p value < 0.001), percentage of patients with an improvement of ≥ 15 letters (p value < 0.001), effect duration per administration (p value = 0.008), retinal detachment (p value < 0.001), endophthalmitis (p value = 0.012), myocardial infarction (p value < 0.001), intravitreal hemorrhage (p value = 0.021), annual treatment cost per patient (p value = 0.001), health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (p value = 0.004), and disability level (p value = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: From a multi-stakeholder perspective, the selection of an appropriate treatment for DME patients should guarantee patient safety and maximize the visual acuity improvement and treatment effect duration. It should also contribute to system sustainability by being affordable, it should have a positive impact on HRQoL, and it should prevent disability.

Use of intravitreal dexamethasone implants in the treatment of diabetic macular edema: Expert recommendations using a Delphi approach.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to develop guidance on the use of intravitreal dexamethasone implants in the treatment of diabetic macular edema. METHOD: The study was performed using the modified Delphi method to obtain a consensus among a panel of experts on management of patients with diabetic macular edema and use of intravitreal dexamethasone implants in clinical practice. Thirty-seven panel members, experts on retina, from different Spanish centers were invited to participate. Individual and anonymous opinions were asked by answering a 76-item questionnaire across 11 topic areas (two rounds were done). Level of agreement was assessed using a Likert-type scale of 9 points. RESULTS: Agreement on "consensus" was reached during the first round in 63 items. The 13 remaining items underwent a second round of voting. After the second round, agreement on "consensus" was reached on five items. Finally, eight items remained without consensus. CONCLUSION: Intravitreal dexamethasone implants are useful in the treatment of patients with diabetic macular edema with different profiles, for example, pseudophakic, poor-adherents, vitrectomized, candidates for cataract surgery, patients with high inflammatory component, and with a history of cardiovascular events. The use of intravitreal dexamethasone reduces the number of visits and facilitates compliance. Experts thought that the switch from anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy to intravitreal dexamethasone implants should be done preferably after three injections. Also, pro re nata treatment provides better results in diabetic macular edema patients as it helps to prevent undertreatment. Finally, experts concluded that clinical guidelines and treatment protocols for diabetic macular edema need to be updated.