A Collaborative Retrospective Study on the Efficacy and Safety of Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant (Ozurdex) in Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema: The European DME Registry Study

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy, effect profile, and safety of dexamethasone implant on diabetic macular edema (DME) in a real-life setting, further comparing results by DME duration, previous treatment status, and diabetic control. Design: A multicenter, retrospective cohort of 340 DME eyes of 287 patients from 25 clinical sites from 8 countries. Methods: Data were analyzed in 2 perspectives: per injection, in which all measurements were grouped and baseline was defined as the day of injection, and thus the pharmacodynamics of single injections could be assessed; and injection series, defined as 2 or more injections with 3 to 6 months between injections analyzing the outcome 3 to 6 months after the last injection. Main Outcome Measures: Primary outcome was improvement of 15 or more letters in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline. Secondary outcomes included improvement of 10 letters or more in BCVA, change in central macular thickness (CMT), and time to maximum improvement and safety. Results: Overall, 762 injections were administered to 340 eyes of 287 patients. Injection series analysis included 171 series in 171 eyes of 150 patients, for a total of 444 injections, with a mean follow-up of 1.7±0.8 years. Of the 762 injections analyzed per injection, 22.7% achieved a 15-letter or more improvement, and 37.8% achieved a 10-letter or more improvement. Mean time to peak improvement was 81.9±39.7 days. Mean maximum change in CMT was –174±171 μm. Overall, 7.6% lost 15 or more letters. More eyes with early DME gained 10 or more letters and fewer eyes lost 10 or more letters compared with eyes with late DME (47.4% vs. 33.9% [P = 0.001] and 8.2% vs. 13.5% [P = 0.029], respectively). Patients with controlled diabetes showed greater CMT reduction (P = 0.0002). A higher percentage of treatment-naive patients gained 10 or 15 letter or more in BCVA (P = 0.001 and P = 0.006, respectively). Intraocular pressure elevation of more than 25 mmHg was found following 7.9% of injections; no endophthalmitis was reported. Conclusions: Dexamethasone implant is an effective and safe treatment for DME. Peak improvement was achieved 3 months after injection and dissipated thereafter. Clinicians and providers may consider shortening treatment intervals

Dog bite injuries of the eye and ocular adnexa

Dog bites result in a diverse range of injuries and complications in the periocular region, particularly in school aged children. It is therefore incumbent on the oculoplastic surgeon to be well versed in both acute and long-term management. The intent of this review is to provide a systematic evaluation of the epidemiology, principles of dog bite wound care, and specific considerations related to common patterns of ophthalmic injury. Review of clinical literature from 1976 to 2014. The majority of periocular injuries result from seemingly benign interactions between young children and familiar dogs. Aggressive saline lavage combined with selective debridement of devitalized tissue is essential. High-risk wounds and vulnerable patient groups may benefit from preventive antibiotic coverage as well as appropriate rabies and tetanus prophylaxis. While the nuances of surgical repair are variable given the heterogeneity of presentation, systematic examination and an algorithm-driven approach underlie the optimal management of these complex injuries

Consensus Recommendations for the Diagnosis of Vitreoretinal Lymphoma

Purpose: To provide recommendations for diagnosis of vitreoretinal lymphoma (VRL). Methods: Literature was reviewed for reports supporting the diagnosis of VRL. A questionnaire (Delphi 1 round) was distributed to 28 participants. In the second round (Delphi 2), items of the questionnaire not reaching consensus (75% agreement) were discussed to finalize the recommendations. Results: Presenting symptoms include floaters and painless loss of vision, vitreous cells organized into sheets or clumps. Retinal lesions are usually multifocal creamy/white in the outer retina. Other findings include retinal lesions with “leopard-skin” appearance and retinal pigment epithelium atrophy. Severe vitreous infiltration without macular edema is the most likely presentation. Diagnostic vitrectomy should be performed. Systemic corticosteroid should be discontinued at least 2 weeks before surgery. An interleukin (IL)-10:IL-6 ratio > 1, positive mutation for the myeloid differentiation primary response 88 gene and monoclonality are indicators of VRL. Multi-modal imaging (optical coherence tomography, fundus autofluorescence) are recommended. Conclusions: A consensus meeting allowed the establishment of recommendations important for the diagnosis of VRL

Outcome of Treatment of Uveitic Macular Edema

PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical outcomes of uveitic macular edema through two years of treatment. DESIGN: Longitudinal follow-up of a randomized cohort. PARTICIPANTS: At baseline, 148 eyes of 117 patients enrolled in the Multicenter Uveitis Steroid Treatment (MUST) Trial had macular edema, and 134 eyes of 108 patients completed two-year follow-up. METHODS: All patients enrolled in the study were randomized to either systemic immunosuppression or intravitreal fluocinolone acetonide implant therapy. Macular edema was defined as thickening of the retina (center point thickness ≥240 µm) on time-domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) of macula. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Improvement in macular edema (≥20% reduction in central point thickness on OCT), resolution of macular edema (normalization of thickness on OCT) and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA). RESULTS: Between randomization and 2-years’ follow-up, 62% and 25% of eyes in the systemic and implant groups respectively, received at least one supplemental regional corticosteroid injection. Overall, by 2-years’ follow-up, macular edema improved in 71% of eyes and resolved in 60%. There were no differences between treatment groups in the proportion of eyes with macular edema improving (systemic therapy vs. implant, 65% vs. 77%, P=0.20) and resolving (52% vs. 68%, P=0.28). However, on average, eyes randomized to implant had more improvement in macular thickness (median decrease of 180µm vs. 109µm in the systemic therapy group, P=0.04). Eyes with fluorescein angiographic leakage at baseline were more likely to improve in macular thickness than those without (76% vs. 58%, P=0.03). Overall, there was a mean 5-letter (1 line) improvement in BCVA at 2 years. Mean changes in BCVA from baseline at 2 years by macular edema response status were: resolution,+10 letters; improvement without resolution, +10 letters (P=0.92); little to no change, 6 letters (P=0.19); and worsening, −16 letters (worsening acuity, P=0.0003). CONCLUSIONS: About two-thirds of eyes with uveitic macular edema were observed to experience improvement in the edema and visual acuity with implant or systemic treatment. Fluocinolone acetonide implant therapy was associated with a greater quantitative improvement in thickness. Associated leakage on fluorescein angiography at baseline was associated with a greater likelihood of improvement in macular edema