2 research outputs found

    Vitrectomized vs non-vitrectomized eyes in DEX implant treatment for DMO-Is there any difference? the VITDEX study

    No full text
    Objective We aimed to compare visual and anatomical outcome in vitrectomized and non-vitrectomized eyes treated with dexamethasone (DEX) implant due to diabetic macular oedema (DMO). Design Multicenter, retrospective, interventional study. Participants 236 eyes from 234 patients with DMO with or without previous vitrectomy performed with follow-up of 12 months. Methods Records were reviewed for cases of DMO treated with DEX implant in vitrectomized and not vitrectomized eyes. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfoveal thickness (CST), and intraocular pressure (IOP) were recorded at baseline and 12 months after treatment with DEX implants. Correlations between vitreous status and visual and anatomical outcome, as well as safety profile were analysed. Main outcome measures BCVA and CST over follow-up period. Secondary outcomes: cataract rate formation, intraocular pressure increase, number of implants needed. Results The non-vitrectomized group included 130 eyes (55.1%), the vitrectomized group included 106 eyes (44.9%). The groups were well balanced for age and gender (p = 0.540, and p = 0.053, respectively). Both groups showed statistically significant improvement in BCVA and CST (for all groups: p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of change in vision (p = 0.89) and anatomy (p = 0.65). The mean number of DEX implants given during follow-up was 3.5 in both groups, and there was no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.81). Conclusion We demonstrated similar anatomical and functional efficacy of DEX implant in non-vitrectomized and vitrectomized eyes. Its efficacy was not influenced by full vitrectomy for diabetic retinopathy complications. Safety profile was well balanced between groups

    Safety of 6000 intravitreal dexamethasone implants

    No full text
    Purpose To evaluate the real-life safety profile of intravitreal dexamethasone implant injection for various retinal conditions. Methods Retrospective multicenter analysis of intravitreal dexamethasone implant injections (700 mu g) due to various retinal conditions including central retinal venous occlusion (1861 injections), diabetic macular oedema (3104 injections), post-surgical cystoid macular oedema (305 injections) and uveitis (381 injections). The eyes were evaluated mainly for the occurrence of adverse events such as glaucoma, cataract, retinal detachment and endophthalmitis along during the follow-up period. Results A total of 6015 injections in 2736 eyes of 1441 patients (mean age of 65.7 +/- 12.9 years) were in total analysed over an average period of 18 months (range 6 months to 102 months). A total of 576 eyes (32.5% of the phakic eyes) developed cataract requiring surgical intervention. However, visually insignificant cataract progression was observed in another 259 phakic eyes (14.6%) which did not require surgical removal. A total of 727 eyes (26.5%) experienced an intraocular pressure (IOP) rise of >25 mm Hg, with 155 eyes (5.67%) having a prior history of glaucoma and 572 eyes (20.9%) having new onset IOP rise. Overall, more than 90% of eyes with IOP rise were managed medically, and 0.5% eyes required filtering surgery. Endophthalmitis (0.07%), retinal detachment (0.03%) and vitreous haemorrhage (0.03%) were rare. There was no significant change in visual acuity (p=0.87) and central macular thickness (p=0.12) at the last follow-up. Conclusion This is the largest real-life study assessing the safety of intravitreal dexamethasone implant injections in various retinal conditions. Cataract progression and intraocular pressure rise are the most common side effects, but are often rather easily manageable
    corecore