Postinjection Endophthalmitis in the Comparison of Age-Related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trials (CATT)

To describe the incidence and outcomes of endophthalmitis after intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF agents in the Comparison of Age-related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trials (CATT) and to assess the effect of use of prophylactic topical antimicrobials on incidence

Intracameral bevacizumab and mitomycin C Trabeculectomy for eyes with neovascular glaucoma: a case series

The purpose of this study was to describe the surgical outcomes and safety of intracameral bevacizumab during trabeculectomy in eyes with neovascular glaucoma. Pilot study included four eyes (four patients) with refractory neovascular glaucoma submitted to fornix-based trabeculectomy with adjunctive use of bevacizumab in the anterior chamber during the procedure. Patients were previously treated with panretinal photocoagulation as standard therapy. Variables evaluated were intraocular pressure, bleb appearance, iris neovascularization, intraoperative/postoperative complications, and visual outcomes. No intraoperative complication was observed. The mean follow-up period was 12.75 (range, 12–15 months). All eyes showed significant intraocular pressure control postoperatively. Iris neovascularization reduced significantly within 1 month after surgery. Mild anterior chamber inflammation was observed during follow-up in all eyes. No significant postoperative complication was observed, and no patient presented visual acuity deterioration. Intracameral bevacizumab may be used as an adjunctive therapy during trabeculectomy in eyes with neovascular glaucoma

Dexamethasone intravitreal implant in previously treated patients with diabetic macular edema : Subgroup analysis of the MEAD study

Background: Dexamethasone intravitreal implant 0.7 mg (DEX 0.7) was approved for treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) after demonstration of its efficacy and safety in the MEAD registration trials. We performed subgroup analysis of MEAD study results to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DEX 0.7 treatment in patients with previously treated DME. Methods: Three-year, randomized, sham-controlled phase 3 study in patients with DME, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of 34.68 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters (20/200.20/50 Snellen equivalent), and central retinal thickness (CRT) 65300 \u3bcm measured by time-domain optical coherence tomography. Patients were randomized to 1 of 2 doses of DEX (0.7 mg or 0.35 mg), or to sham procedure, with retreatment no more than every 6 months. The primary endpoint was 6515-letter gain in BCVA at study end. Average change in BCVA and CRT from baseline during the study (area-under-the-curve approach) and adverse events were also evaluated. The present subgroup analysis evaluated outcomes in patients randomized to DEX 0.7 (marketed dose) or sham based on prior treatment for DME at study entry. Results: Baseline characteristics of previously treated DEX 0.7 (n = 247) and sham (n=261) patients were similar. In the previously treated subgroup, mean number of treatments over 3 years was 4.1 for DEX 0.7 and 3.2 for sham, 21.5 % of DEX 0.7 patients versus 11.1 % of sham had 6515-letter BCVA gain from baseline at study end (P = 0.002), mean average BCVA change from baseline was +3.2 letters with DEX 0.7 versus +1.5 letters with sham (P = 0.024), and mean average CRT change from baseline was -126.1 \u3bcm with DEX 0.7 versus -39.0 \u3bcm with sham(P < 0.001). Cataract-related adverse events were reported in 70.3 % of baseline phakic patients in the previously treated DEX 0.7 subgroup; vision gains were restored following cataract surgery. Conclusions: DEX 0.7 significantly improved visual and anatomic outcomes in patients with DME previously treated with laser, intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor, intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide, or a combination of these therapies. The safety profile of DEX 0.7 in previously treated patients was similar to its safety profile in the total study population

Facebook, Twitter, and the Wild West of IP Enforcement on Social Media: Weighing the Merits of a Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy, 49 J. Marshall L. Rev. 959 (2016)

In Part I, this comment will discuss the different types of intellectual property issues that can arise on social media websites. Part II will then discuss the three actions currently available to an infringed owner attempting to protect its intellectual property rights. Part III will discuss the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), a successful mechanism for resolving domain name disputes online. Finally, Part IV will discuss the possible creation of a USRP, which will be modeled after the UDRP, in which a private third-party arbitrator would resolve intellectual property disputes in the social media arena. This section will debate the viability and desirability of such an option, keeping in mind the need to balance fairness, accuracy in decisions, consistency, cost, and time. This comment will conclude that a USRP, while attainable, is not desirable. Instead, as Part V will discuss, social media websites should play the primary role in regulating social media intellectual property disputes. This comment argues that the best solution to this problem is for social media websites to change their regulations by making their policies more cohesive and coherent, and their takedown requests and decisions more transparent