Widening use of dexamethasone implant for the treatment of macular edema

Sustained-release intravitreal 0.7 mg dexamethasone (DEX) implant is approved in Europe for the treatment of macular edema related to diabetic retinopathy, branch retinal vein occlusion, central retinal vein occlusion, and non-infectious uveitis. The implant is formulated in a biodegradable copolymer to release the active ingredient within the vitreous chamber for up to 6 months after an intravitreal injection, allowing a prolonged interval of efficacy between injections with a good safety profile. Various other ocular pathologies with inflammatory etio­pathogeneses associated with macular edema have been treated by DEX implant, including neovascular age-related macular degeneration, Irvine–Gass syndrome, vasoproliferative retinal tumors, retinal telangiectasia, Coats’ disease, radiation maculopathy, retinitis pigmentosa, and macular edema secondary to scleral buckling and pars plana vitrectomy. We undertook a review to provide a comprehensive collection of all of the diseases that benefit from the use of the sustained-release DEX implant, alone or in combination with concomitant therapies. A MEDLINE search revealed lack of randomized controlled trials related to these indications. Therefore we included and analyzed all available studies (retrospective and prospective, com­parative and non-comparative, randomized and nonrandomized, single center and multicenter, and case report). There are reports in the literature of the use of DEX implant across a range of macular edema-related pathologies, with their clinical experience supporting the use of DEX implant on a case-by-case basis with the aim of improving patient outcomes in many macular pathologies. As many of the reported macular pathologies are difficult to treat, a new treat­ment option that has a beneficial influence on the clinical course of the disease may be useful in clinical practice

Diathermy of leaking sclerotomies after 23-gauge transconjunctival pars plana vitrectomy: a prospective study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of bipolar diathermy in ensuring closure of leaking sclerotomies after complete 23-gauge transconjunctival sutureless vitrectomy. METHODS: In this prospective, interventional case series, in 136 eyes of 136 patients with at least one leaking sclerotomy at the end of a complete 23-gauge transconjunctival sutureless vitrectomy, external bipolar wet-field diathermy was applied to leaking sclerotomies, including the conjunctiva and sclera. Intraoperative wound closure, and postoperatively, at 6 hours, 1 day and 3 days, sclerotomies leakage, intraocular pressure, hypotony, and hypotony-related complications were evaluated. RESULTS: Intraoperative closure was achieved in 231 of 238 leaking sclerotomies (97%) that received diathermy. One of these with postoperative leakage needed suture. Compared with baseline (14.4 ± 2.8 mmHg), mean intraocular pressure was lower at 6 hours (13.2 ± 3.8 mmHg, Tukey-Kramer P < 0.001) and not different at 24 hours or 72 hours. Hypotony (intraocular pressure <5 mmHg) was observed in 6 eyes (4.5%) at 6 hours, in 2 (1.5%) at 24 hours, and in none at 3 days. Logistic regression analysis showed that, 6 hours postoperatively, hypotony was related to younger age (≤50 years) at surgery (P = 0.031). No hypotony-related complications were recorded. CONCLUSION: Bipolar wet-field diathermy of sutureless sclerotomies is an effective method for ensuring a leaking sclerotomies closure

Efficacy of Intravitreal dexamethasone implant in different patterns of diabetic macular edema

Purpose: Different patterns of diabetic macular edema (DME) suggest different pathogenesis and drug response. We evaluated the outcomes after intravitreal dexamethasone (DEX) implant for DME with or without serous retinal detachment (SRD). Methods: In this retrospective study, 22 naïve patients (23 eyes) with DME who underwent a single DEX implant were evaluated. Based on the optical coherence tomographic pattern of DME, 12 eyes had a cystoid macular edema pattern (Group 1) and 11 eyes had an SRD pattern (Group 2). The best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central retinal thickness (R), central retinal volume (CRV), SRD height (SRDh), and intraocular pressure (IOP) were recorded before and at two and four months after the treatment. Results: There were no significant differences between the groups regarding demographic, clinical data and outcomes at baseline. In Group 1, the CRT and CRV significantly decreased at two months (P = 0.002 and P = 0.01, respectively), while the BCVA significantly improved at four months (P = 0.03). In Group 2, the CRT and CRV significantly improved (P < 0.01 and P ≤ 0.01, respectively) during the follow-up period. At four months, both groups showed a recurrence of DME, Group 1 in particular (two-month CRT reduction, -149 ± 127 μm vs four-month CRT reduction, -72 ± 174 μm; P = 0.04). The mean reduction in CRV was significantly different at four months (Group 1, -0.49 ± 1.7 mm3vs Group 2, -1.3 ± 1.3 mm3; P = 0.04). In Group 2, the SRDh significantly decreased at two (P = 0.01) and four months (P = 0.01). Four cases with elevated IOP were managed. Conclusion: DEX implants were found to be effective in different patterns of DME. The SRD pattern may predict a longer-lasting morphologic efficacy

Visual functional changes after ocriplasmin injection for vitreomacular traction: A microperimetric analysis

PURPOSE: The purpose is to evaluate functional changes after ocriplasmin injection to treat vitreomacular traction (VMT) by microperimetry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective interventional study on patients underwent an intravitreal ocriplasmin injection. Optical coherence tomography, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) test, and microperimetry were performed at baseline, 1 week, 1 and 3 months. Microperimeter recorded retinal sensitivity (RS) and central retinal sensitivity (CRS) at central 12° and 4°, respectively, and fixation as bivariate contour ellipse area (BCEA) at 68%, 95%, and 99% of fixation points. Functional parameters were analyzed in patients who had (Group A) or not (Group B) VMT release. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients including 18 with VMT and 3 with VMT plus macular hole (MH) were treated. Eleven patients achieved VMT resolution including all cases with MH that achieved hole closure. An impairment of BCVA, RS and CRS (P < 0.01; P < 0.001; P = 0.001, respectively) was reported at 1 week followed by a significant improvement (BCVA, P = 0.001; RS, CRS, P = 0.02) at 3 months. The early impairment of visual acuity and sensitivity significantly occurred in Group B (P ≤ 0.01) while their recovery significantly occurred in Group A (P < 0.01). BCEA significantly increased in dimension (68%, P = 0.01; 95%, P = 0.03) at 1 week, subsequently returning to near baseline values over follow-up. Only in Group A, fixation stability significantly improved at 3 months. CONCLUSION: Microperimetry confirms an early and reversible functional impairment after ocriplasmin injection regardless VMT resolution. If a greater decrease in function could occur in the eyes without VMT resolution, a better functional recovery could occur in the event of VMT resolution