Vitrectomized versus non-vitrectomized eyes in diabetic macular edema response to ranibizumab-retinal layers thickness as prognostic biomarkers.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Pessoa B
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8630028 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeThis retrospective study aimed to compare the efficacy of intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) and intravitreal dexamethasone implant (IDI) for pseudophakic vitrectomized eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME) in a single institution.MethodsPseudophakic vitrectomized eyes with treatment-naïve center-involved DME were enrolled, with one eye in each patient. They were divided into two groups: one group receiving IDI every 3 to 4 months and another group receiving IVR using 3 monthly plus treat-and-extend injections, all with monthly follow-up for 6 months. Switch of intravitreal drugs or deferred macular laser was not allowed. Primary outcome measures included change in central foveal thickness (CFT) in 1 mm by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at Month 6.ResultsTwenty-two eyes were included in the IDI group and 26 eyes in the IVR group. The baseline demographics, glycosylated hemoglobin level, intraocular pressure (IOP), BCVA, and CFT did not significantly differ (p > 0.05). Compared to baseline data, CFT decreased and BCVA improved significantly after either IDI or IVR at Month 6 (p < 0.05). Significantly better mean final BCVA (0.38 logMAR vs. 0.62 logMAR, p=0.04), more mean visual gain (-0.30 logMAR vs. -0.15 logMAR, p=0.02), lower mean final CFT (310.9 μm vs. 384.2 μm, p=0.04), and larger mean CFT decrease (-150.0 μm vs. -60.1 μm, p=0.03) were found in the IDI group compared to those in the IVR group. A smaller mean treatment number (2.6 vs. 5.6, p < 0.001) and higher rate of postinjection ocular hypertension requiring topical hypotensive agent therapy (27.3% vs. 0%, p=0.0002) were demonstrated in the IDI group than those in the IVR group.ConclusionWe concluded that IDI and IVR can both effectively treat vitrectomized eyes with DME. Dexamethasone implants had significantly better visual/anatomical improvement, smaller treatment number, and higher rate of elevated IOP after injection than IVR in pseudophakic vitrectomized eyes with DME in a 6-month period.
| S-EPMC8448602 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimTo evaluate the efficacy of intravitreal Aflibercept injection (IAI) for vitrectomized eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME) at one year.MethodsThis is a prospective, non-comparative, multicenter observational study including diabetic patients whose HbA1c is < 9%, with visual acuity between 20/400 to 20/40 due to DME, who have undergone vitrectomy since at least 3 months before the first aflibercept injection. Treatment protocol included 5 monthly aflibercept injection followed by a ProReNata regimen during the first year. Visual acuity, OCT findings and number of IAI were assessed at 6 months and one year.ResultsForty-six eyes were included. Indications for vitrectomy were epiretinal membrane (58.7%), intravitreal hemorrhage (26.1%), and vitreomacular traction (8.7%), retinal detachment (4.3%), and other cause (4.3%). Median duration of macular edema was 3 years. Median interval between vitrectomy and first visit was 9 months. Thirty eyes were non-naïve and received previously thermal laser (44.3%), intravitreal injection of triamcinolone (26.7%), of ranibizumab (70%), of dexamethasone implant (36.7%), or bevacizumab (6.7%). Data was available for 35 eyes at 1 year. Visual gain was significant, +6 letters (p <0.001) and central subfield thickness (CST) decreased significantly (-108μm, p < 0.001) at 1 year. Mean number of injections was 9.3 and mean interval injection was 5.8 weeks.ConclusionThese results suggest that IAI may be beneficial in vitrectomized eyes with refractory DME which require frequent injections to obtain visual and anatomical improvement.Clinical trial registrationhttp://www.clinicaltrials.gov, registration Number NCT02874859.
| S-EPMC8123959 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We compared the efficacy of intravitreal aflibercept (IVA) to intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) injections in eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME). The medical records of 49 eyes of 36 patients who were diagnosed with DME and had received IVR and 46 eyes of 40 patients who had received IVA treatment were reviewed. The central macular thickness (CMT) and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were measured at the baseline and at 1, 3, and 6 months after the IVR or IVA. The mean number of injections of IVR was 2.6 ± 1.1 and of IVA was 2.7 ± 1.4. At 6 months, the CMT was significantly thinner than the baseline after IVR and after IVA. The mean BCVA was significantly better than the baseline after IVR only at 1 and 3 months and after IVA at 1 and 6 months. The BCVA of eyes with serous retinal detachment (SRD) was significantly better at 1 month after the IVR and at 1 month and 6 months after the IVA. The BCVAs improved more significantly in the SRD+ group than in the SRD- group. The effects of IVA persist longer than that of IVR. The effectiveness of both IVR and IVA was not dependent on the presence of SRD (IRB#2107).
| S-EPMC5512051 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Anti-VEGF drugs are as the first-line therapies for diabetic macular edema (DME). In this study, we investigated the association between hyperreflective foci in the outer retinal layers and functional efficacy in DME patients who received intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) injections. We retrospectively reviewed 77 eyes of 71 patients with DME treated with pro re nata IVR injections for at least 12 months. We evaluated how baseline hyperreflective foci in the outer retinal layers on spectral domain optical coherence tomography images were associated with an improvement in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution visual acuity (logMAR VA) at 12 months. Forty-three eyes with hyperreflective foci in the outer retinal layers had greater VA improvement than 34 eyes without such foci at 12 months. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that both logMAR VA and hyperreflective foci in the outer retinal layers at baseline were associated with VA improvement. Structural analyses revealed that the central subfield thickness was decreased and that the ellipsoid zone of photoreceptors was improved more significantly in eyes with hyperreflective foci in the outer layers than eyes without such lesions. Baseline hyperreflective foci in the outer retinal layers predict the functional efficacy of IVR injections for DME.
| S-EPMC6972781 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceComparisons of the relative effect of 3 anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents to treat diabetic macular edema warrant further assessment.ObjectiveTo provide additional outcomes from a randomized trial evaluating 3 anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents for diabetic macular edema within subgroups based on baseline visual acuity (VA) and central subfield thickness (CST) as evaluated on optical coherence tomography.Design, setting, and participantsPost hoc exploratory analyses were conducted of randomized trial data on 660 adults with diabetic macular edema and decreased VA (Snellen equivalent, approximately 20/32 to 20/320). The original study was conducted between August 22, 2012, and August 28, 2013. Analysis was conducted from January 7 to June 2, 2015.InterventionsRepeated 0.05-mL intravitreous injections of 2.0 mg of aflibercept (224 eyes), 1.25 mg of bevacizumab (218 eyes), or 0.3 mg of ranibizumab (218 eyes) as needed per protocol.Main outcomes and measuresOne-year VA and CST outcomes within prespecified subgroups based on both baseline VA and CST thresholds, defined as worse (20/50 or worse) or better (20/32 to 20/40) VA and thicker (≥400 µm) or thinner (250 to 399 µm) CST.ResultsIn the subgroup with worse baseline VA (n = 305), irrespective of baseline CST, aflibercept showed greater improvement than bevacizumab or ranibizumab for several VA outcomes. In the subgroup with better VA and thinner CST at baseline (61-73 eyes across 3 treatment groups), VA outcomes showed little difference between groups; mean change was +7.2, +8.4, and +7.6 letters in the aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab groups, respectively. However, in the subgroup with better VA and thicker CST at baseline (31-43 eyes), there was a suggestion of worse VA outcomes in the bevacizumab group; mean change from baseline to 1 year was +9.5, +5.4, and +9.5 letters in the aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab groups, respectively, and VA letter score was greater than 84 (approximately 20/20) in 21 of 33 (64%), 7 of 31 (23%), and 21 of 43 (49%) eyes, respectively. The adjusted differences and 95% CIs were 39% (17% to 60%) for aflibercept vs bevacizumab, 25% (5% to 46%) for ranibizumab vs bevacizumab, and 13% (-8% to 35%) for aflibercept vs ranibizumab.Conclusions and relevanceThese post hoc secondary findings suggest that for eyes with better initial VA and thicker CST, some VA outcomes may be worse in the bevacizumab group than in the aflibercept and ranibizumab groups. Given the exploratory nature of these analyses and the small sample size within subgroups, caution is suggested when using the data to guide treatment considerations for patients.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01627249.
| S-EPMC5567793 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe relative efficacy and safety of intravitreous aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab in the treatment of diabetic macular edema are unknown.MethodsAt 89 clinical sites, we randomly assigned 660 adults (mean age, 61±10 years) with diabetic macular edema involving the macular center to receive intravitreous aflibercept at a dose of 2.0 mg (224 participants), bevacizumab at a dose of 1.25 mg (218 participants), or ranibizumab at a dose of 0.3 mg (218 participants). The study drugs were administered as often as every 4 weeks, according to a protocol-specified algorithm. The primary outcome was the mean change in visual acuity at 1 year.ResultsFrom baseline to 1 year, the mean visual-acuity letter score (range, 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better visual acuity; a score of 85 is approximately 20/20) improved by 13.3 with aflibercept, by 9.7 with bevacizumab, and by 11.2 with ranibizumab. Although the improvement was greater with aflibercept than with the other two drugs (P<0.001 for aflibercept vs. bevacizumab and P=0.03 for aflibercept vs. ranibizumab), it was not clinically meaningful, because the difference was driven by the eyes with worse visual acuity at baseline (P<0.001 for interaction). When the initial visual-acuity letter score was 78 to 69 (equivalent to approximately 20/32 to 20/40) (51% of participants), the mean improvement was 8.0 with aflibercept, 7.5 with bevacizumab, and 8.3 with ranibizumab (P>0.50 for each pairwise comparison). When the initial letter score was less than 69 (approximately 20/50 or worse), the mean improvement was 18.9 with aflibercept, 11.8 with bevacizumab, and 14.2 with ranibizumab (P<0.001 for aflibercept vs. bevacizumab, P=0.003 for aflibercept vs. ranibizumab, and P=0.21 for ranibizumab vs. bevacizumab). There were no significant differences among the study groups in the rates of serious adverse events (P=0.40), hospitalization (P=0.51), death (P=0.72), or major cardiovascular events (P=0.56).ConclusionsIntravitreous aflibercept, bevacizumab, or ranibizumab improved vision in eyes with center-involved diabetic macular edema, but the relative effect depended on baseline visual acuity. When the initial visual-acuity loss was mild, there were no apparent differences, on average, among study groups. At worse levels of initial visual acuity, aflibercept was more effective at improving vision. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01627249.).
| S-EPMC4422053 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To report macular thickness values in normal eyes and eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME) using time-domain (TD) and spectral-domain (SD) optical coherence tomography (OCT), and to derive a conversion equation.The index study was a prospective investigation conducted on 80 eyes from 40 normal subjects and 130 eyes from 118 patients with DME seen in our clinic. Retinal thickness values from the central 1 mm of the macula and surrounding four ETDRS subfields were acquired using TD-OCT (Stratus OCT) and SD-OCT (SPECTRALIS HRA+OCT). Measurements of the central (C) subfield from both devices were used to derive a conversion equation. The equation was used to predict SD-OCT values using measurements from TD-OCT. Agreement between predicted and actual SD-OCT measurements was assessed.In normal eyes, the mean difference between TD-OCT and SD-OCT measurements of the C subfield was 76 μm (CI(95)=74 and 77, respectively). The conversion equation, y=1.029x+72.49, was derived. In eyes with DME, using the equation, SPECTRALIS-predicted values were 5% higher than actual measurements, with 95% of predicted values falling within 9% of the actual measurements. Relocating SD-OCT grids to match the location on TD-OCT resulted in predicted values falling within 7% of actual measurements.The percent difference between actual thickness measurements from SPECTRALIS and predicted thickness measurements, using the conversion equation, was within reported limits of repeatability of Stratus in eyes with DME. Our equation may help correlate OCT values from both devices in standard care and clinical trials for DME.
| S-EPMC3298977 | biostudies-other
Project description:Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of the intravitreal dexamethasone (DEX) implant for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) in vitrectomized and nonvitrectomized eyes. Methods: We performed a literature search in four electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library) from inception to 22 May 2022. Studies comparing the efficacy of the DEX implant in vitrectomized and nonvitrectomized eyes with DME with at least 3 months of follow-up were included. The main outcomes included comparison of the mean change in the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) from baseline to different follow-up endpoints between the vitrectomized and nonvitrectomized groups. The secondary outcomes were the mean duration of action for the first DEX implantation and the number of required injections throughout the follow-up period. Safety data were collected and compared. Results: The final analysis included 7 studies involving 582 eyes, 208 vitrectomized eyes and 374 nonvitrectomized eyes. The mean between-group differences in BCVA improvement were not significant at any endpoint, with averages difference of -0.07 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) (p = 0.088) at 1 month, -0.03 logMAR (p = 0.472) 3 months, -0.07 logMAR (p = 0.066) 6 months, and -0.04 logMAR (p = 0.486) 12 months. The mean between-group differences in CMT reduction were not statistically significant, with mean differences of 7.17 μm (p = 0.685) at 1 month, 20.03 μm (p = 0.632) 3 months, -1.80 μm (p = 0.935) 6 months, and -25.65 μm (p = 0.542) 12 months. However, the vitrectomized group had a significantly shorter duration of action during the first DEX implantation than the nonvitrectomized group, with a mean difference of 0.8 months (p = 0.005). No significant between-group differences were detected for the number of required injections or safety profile. Conclusion: This meta-analysis showed similar efficacy and safety of the sustained-release DEX intravitreal implant for vitrectomized and nonvitrectomized eyes with DME. The intravitreal DEX implant could be considered an effective choice for DME treatment in eyes with prior vitrectomy.
| S-EPMC9751612 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo compare per-region macular sensitivity and delay from objective perimetry with Matrix perimetry and retinal thickness in mild diabetic macular edema (DMO).MethodsThirty-three patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) aged 59.2 ± 10.5 years participated in a longitudinal study. Macular thickness, sensitivities and delays from the objectiveFIELD Analyzer (OFA), and Matrix perimeter sensitivities were mapped onto a common spatial layout to compute per-region correlations between structure/function measures. A generalized linear mixed-effects logistic regression model determined which variables contributed to clinical diagnosis of DMO.ResultsFor OFA, the mean sensitivity differences compared with normal in patients with T2D were negative and the mean delay differences positive, indicating lowered sensitivities and prolonged delays, both increasing with diabetes duration. Shorter diabetes duration could produce either localized peripheral hypersensitivities or shorter delays. Functional change could occur when retinal thickness was stable. Peripheral macular thickness correlated with central and peripheral OFA sensitivity and delay, all P < 0.0012 in DMO and a median of P = 0.001 without DMO; this was not true for Matrix sensitivities. The logistic model determined that peripheral thickness, OFA sensitivity (P = 0.043), and time in the study (P = 0.001) contribute independently to the odds of DMO versus no DMO.ConclusionsMean sensitivities decreased and mean delays increased with duration of diabetes. Peripheral macular thickness correlated significantly with central and peripheral macular OFA sensitivity and delay. Peripheral macular thickness and functional measures may provide sensitive prognostic data.Translational relevanceFunctional loss can precede structural change in DMO, so including such functional assessment for deciding on treatment may be beneficial.
| S-EPMC8631055 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To evaluate the effect of a topical, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug, nepafenac 0.1%, in eyes with noncentral diabetic macular edema.Multicenter, double-masked randomized trial. Individuals with good visual acuity and noncentral-involved diabetic macular edema were randomly assigned to nepafenac 0.1% (N = 61) or placebo (nepafenac vehicle, N = 64) 3 times a day for 12 months. The primary outcome was mean change in optical coherence tomography retinal volume at 12 months.Mean baseline retinal volume was 7.8 mm. At 12 months, in the nepafenac and placebo groups respectively, mean change in retinal volume was -0.03 mm and -0.02 mm (treatment group difference: -0.02, 95% confidence interval: -0.27 to 0.23, P = 0.89). Central-involved diabetic macular edema was present in 7 eyes (11%) and 9 eyes (14%) at the 12-month visit (P = 0.79), respectively. No differences in visual acuity outcomes were identified. One study participant developed a corneal melt after using nepafenac in the nonstudy eye, which had a history of severe dry eye. No additional safety concerns were evident.In eyes with noncentral diabetic macular edema and good visual acuity, topical nepafenac 0.1% 3 times daily for 1 year likely does not have a meaningful effect on optical coherence tomography-measured retinal thickness.
| S-EPMC4408212 | biostudies-literature