ObjectiveTo observe the clinical efficacy of dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX) in the treatment of active non-infectious uveitis macular edema (NIU-ME).MethodsA retrospective observational study. From February 2018 to February 2019, 23 patients (26 eyes) were included in the study who were diagnosed with NIU-ME at the Department of Ophthalmology, Central Theater Command General Hospital and received intravitreal DEX treatment. Among 23 patients, there were 8 males (8 eyes) and 15 females (18 eyes); the average age was 46.9 years; the average course of disease was 9.2±2.4 months. All the affected eyes underwent BCVA and intraocular pressure examination; at the same time, OCT was used to measure the central retinal thickness (CMT) of the macula. Snellen visual acuity chart was used for visual inspection. The average BCVA of the affected eye was 0.281±0.191, the average intraocular pressure was 16.2±0.8 mmHg (1 mmHg=0.133 kPa), and the average CMT was 395.4±63.7 μm. Among the 23 patients, 8 patients had middle uveitis and 15 patients had posterior uveitis. Seven patients had received intravenous infusion of methylprednisolone, 5 patients had been treated with methylprednisolone combined with immunosuppressive agents, and 11 patients had not received any treatment. All the affected eyes were treated with DEX intravitreal injection. Patients received repeated visual acuity, intraocular pressure and OCT examination with follow-up after injection. During the follow-up period, patients with recurrence of edema or poor efficacy, systemic methylprednisolone and intravitreal reinjection of DEX, triamcinolone acetonide or methotrexate should be considered based on the patient's own conditions. We observed the changes of BCVA, intraocular pressure and CMT before and after injection in the affected eyes, and analyzed the variance of a single repeated measurement factor. At the same time, we observed the occurrence of ocular adverse reactions and systemic complications.ResultsAfter treatment 1.2±0.4, 3.3±0.3, 6.7±1.1, 9.2±1.1, 12.2±0.6 months, the BCVA of the affected eyes were 0.488±0.296, 0.484±0.266, 0.414± 0.247, 0.411±0.244 and 0.383±0.232; CMT was 280.2±42.7, 271.0±41.4, 292.5±42.9, 276.2±40.5, 268.4±26.6 μm, respectively. Compared with before treatment, the BCVA and CMT of the all eyes increased after treatment, and the difference was statistically significant (F=30.99, 5 196.92; P＜0.000). Among 23 eyes completed a 12-month follow-up, 13 eyes (56.5%) received 2 injections, 3 eyes (13.0%) received 3 injections, and other 7 eyes (30.4%) received only 1 injection. After treatment 1.2±0.4 months, 5 patients (6 eyes) with intraocular pressure＞25 mmHg gradually returned to normal after treatment with two eye drops for lowering intraocular pressure; 1 patient (2 eyes) with intraocular pressure＞40 mmHg, the intraocular pressure gradually returned to normal after 3 kinds of eye drops for lowering intraocular pressure.ConclusionIntravitreal injection of DEX in the treatment of NIU-ME can improve the visual acuity of the affected eye and reduce CMT.
Objective To evaluate the safety and efficacy of dexamethasone intravitreal implant 0.7 mg (DEX) for treatment of macular edema associated with retinal vein occlusion (RVO). Methods This study was a six-month, randomized, double-masked, sham-controlled, multicenter, phase 3 clinical trial with a 2-month open-label study extension. Patients with branch or central RVO received DEX (n=129) or sham procedure (n=130) in the study eye at baseline; all patients who met re-treatment criteria received DEX at month 6. Efficacy measures included Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and central retinal thickness (CRT) on optical coherence tomography. Results Time to ≥15-letter BCVA improvement from baseline during the first 6 months (primary endpoint) was earlier with DEX than sham (P＜0.001). At month 2 (peak effect), the percentage of patients with ≥15-letter BCVA improvement from baseline was DEX: 34.9%, sham: 11.5%; mean BCVA change from baseline was DEX: 10.6±10.4 letters, sham: 1.7±12.3 letters; and mean CRT change from baseline was DEX: ?407±212 μm, sham: ?62±224 μm (all P＜0.001). Outcomes were better with DEX than sham in both branch and central RVO. The most common treatment-emergent adverse event was in-creased intraocular pressure (IOP). Increase sin IOP generally were controlled with topical medication. Mean IOP normalized by month 4, and no patient required incisional glaucoma surgery. Conclusions DEX had a favorable safety profile and provided clinically significant benefit in a Chinese patient population with RVO. Visual and anatomic outcomes were improved with DEX relative to sham for 3 - 4 months after a single implant.
ObjectiveTo observe the short-term efficacy and safety of a new strategy of dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX) combined with ranibizumab in the treatment of retinal vein occlusion (RVO) secondary to macular edema (ME) (RVO-ME). MethodsA prospective clinical interventional study. From May 2020 to September 2021, 78 RVO-ME patients with 78 eyes diagnosed in the eye examination of Department of Ophthalmology of The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui University of Science&Technology were included in the study. Among them, there were 35 males and 43 females, all with monocular disease. Branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) was found in 40 patients with 40 eyes; central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) was found in 38 patients with 38 eyes. According to the treatment strategies, patients were randomly divided into DEX and ranibizumab combination therapy group (initial combination therapy group), DEX monotherapy group and ranibizumab monotherapy group, with 29 eyes, 26 eyes and 23 eyes respectively. Different types of RVO were divided into different treatment groups of BRVO and CRVO. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and frequency domain optical coherence tomography were performed. The BCVA examination was carried out using the international standard visual acuity chart, which was converted into the logarithmic minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) visual acuity during statistics. There were no significant differences in logMAR BCVA (χ2=2.376) and central retinal thickness (CRT) (F=0.052) among the three groups (P＞0.05). After treatment, the patients were followed up every month for 6 months. The changes of BCVA, CRT and the incidence of adverse reactions were observed during follow-up. One-way ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis H test were used to compare the differences. ResultsDuring the follow-up period, compared with the baseline, the BCVA of the eyes in the initial combination treatment group, DEX treatment group and ranibizumab treatment group were significantly improved (Z=110.970, 90.359, 207.303), and CRT was significantly decreased (F=107.172, 88.418, 61.040), the difference was statistically significant (P＜0.01). At 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 months after treatment, there were significant differences in the mean changes in BCVA between the initial combined treatment group, DEX treatment group, and ranibizumab treatment group (χ2=34.522, 29.570, 14.199, 7.000, 6.434, 6.880; P＜0.05); 1, 2, 3, and 6 months after treatment, the differences were statistically significant (F=4.313, 7.520, 3.699, 3.152; P＜0.05). The time required to improve BCVA by 0.1 logMAR units in the initial combination treatment group, DEX treatment group, and ranibizumab treatment group was 5.73 (3.21, 8.48), 9.97 (6.29, 18.78), and 20.00 (9.41, 37.89) d, respectively; The time required for CRT to drop to 300 μm was 24.31 (21.32, 26.15), 29.42 (25.65, 31.37), and 29.17 (25.28, 36.94) d, respectively. The BCVA improvement of 0.1 logMAR unit and the time required for CRT to decrease to 300 μm in the eyes of initial combined treatment group were shorter than those in the eyes of DEX treatment group and the ranibizumab treatment group, and the differences were statistically significant (Z=－3.533, －4.445, －3.670, －4.030; P＜0.01). Different BRVO treatment groups: 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6 months after treatment, the mean BCVA changes were significantly different (χ2=24.989, 21.652, 11.627, 7.054, 9.698; P＜0.05); CRVO was different treatment group: 1 and 2 months after treatment, there were significant differences in mean BCVA changes (χ2=11.137, 9.746; P＜0.05). Two months after treatment, there were significant differences in CRT changes between BRVO and CRVO groups with different treatment regimens (F=3.960, 3.722; P＜0.01). The time required to improve BCVA by 0.1 logMAR unit in the eyes of BRVO and CRVO combined treatment group was shorter than that in the eyes of BRVO, CRVO DEX treatment group and the BRVO, CRVO ranibizumab treatment group, and the differences were statistically significant (BRVO: Z=－2.687, －3.877; P＜0.05; CRVO: Z=－2.437, －3.575; P＜0.05). The time required for CRT to drop to 300 μm in the CRVO combined treatment group was significantly shorter than that in the CRVO DEX treatment group and the CRVO ranibizumab treatment group, and the difference was statistically significant (F=6.910, P＜0.010); there was no statistically significant difference between the different BRVO treatment groups (F=1.786, P＞0.05). The number of re-treated eyes in the initial combined treatment group and DEX treatment group was less than that in the ranibizumab treatment group, and the difference was statistically significant (χ2=18.330, 7.224; P＜0.05). The retreatment interval of the eyes in the initial combined treatment group was significantly longer than that in the DEX treatment group and the ranibizumab treatment group, and the difference was statistically significant (P＜0.01). There was no significant difference in the incidence of intraocular hypertension among the initial combined treatment group, DEX treatment group and ranibizumab treatment group (χ2=0.058, P＞0.05). ConclusionsThe new strategy of initial combination therapy with DEX and ranibizumab in the treatment of RVO-ME has a better short-term effect. Compared with the monotherapy group, the retreatment interval is shorter, the visual and anatomical benefits are faster, the efficacy lasts longer, and the safety is better.
Endophthalmitis caused by intravitreal injection is a rare disease which impair patients’s vision. In recent years, with the increase of the diseases and frequency of intravitreal injections, the incidence of endophthalmitis has increased. Standardizing each step of intravitreal injections is an important method to reduce postoperative endophthalmitis. Despite the current availability of prevention strategies providing by a lot of clinical trials, there are considerable variations and a lack of consensus and inconsistencies in clinical practice. Understanding the existing key measures, standardizing the operation of intravitreal injection in my country, and minimizing the incidence of infective endophthalmitis are of positive significance for improving the treatment of ophthalmology, especially fundus diseases.
ObjectiveTo observe the efficacy of parsplana vitrectomy (PPV) combined with 0.7 mg dexamethasone sustained-release Ozurdex intravitreal implantation in the treatment of children with ocular toxocariasis (OT). MethodsA retrospective clinical study. Fifty-three pediatric patients (53 eyes) diagnosed with OT and underwent PPV in Beijing Tongren Eye Center of Beijing Tongren hospital from March 2015 to December 2021 were included. There were 30 males and 23 females, with an average age of 7.07±3.45 (4-14) years; all were unilateral. Color Doppler imaging, fundus color photography, optical coherence tomography examinations were performed for patients who can cooperated with the examiners. Forty-three eyes were examined by best corrected visual acuity (BCVA); 47 eyes were examined by intraocular pressure; 29 eyes were examined by ultrasound biomicroscopy. According to the location of granuloma, OT was divided into posterior pole granulomatous type (posterior type), peripheral granulomatous type (peripheral type), and chronic endophthalmitis type. According to whether Ozurdex was implanted into the vitreous cavity after PPV, the children were divided into the oral glucocorticoid group after PPV (group A) and the PPV combined with vitreous cavity implantation of Ozurdex group (group B), 37 cases with 37 eyes and 16 cases with 16 eyes, respectively. There was no significant difference in age (t=0.432), sex composition ratio (χ2=0.117), BCVA (χ2=0.239), and clinical type (χ2=0.312) between the two groups (P＞0.05). The follow-up time after surgery was ≥5 months. The intraocular pressure at 1 week and 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery, the changes of BCVA and the occurrence of complications such as concurrent cataract and epimacular membrane were observed at the last follow-up, and the incidence of obesity in the children during the follow-up period was recorded. The measurement data between groups was compared by independent sample t test; the enumeration data was compared by χ2 test. ResultsOne month after the operation, the intraocular pressure of group A and group B were 15.17±6.21 and 25.28±10.38 mm Hg (1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa) respectively; the intraocular pressure of group B was significantly higher than that of group A, the difference was statistically significant (t=0.141, P=0.043). At the last follow-up, there was no significant difference in the percentage of visual acuity improvement between the two groups (χ2=0.315, P=0.053); there was no significant difference in the incidence of concurrent cataract and epimacular membrane (χ2=0.621, P＞0.05). Among the 37 cases in group A, 32 cases (86.5%, 32/37) developed obesity symptoms during the follow-up period. ConclusionPPV combined with intravitreal implantation of Ozurdex and oral glucocorticoid after PPV can effectively improve the visual acuity of the affected eye; the incidence of complications is similar, however, the incidence of obesity after oral glucocorticoid is higher.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the safety and efficacy of the intravitreal methotrexate treatment in patients with primary vitreoretinal lymphoma (PVRL). MethodsRetrospective non-comparative interventional case series. Fourteen patients (26 eyes) with biopsy-proven PVRL were included in the study. All patients received examination of Snellen chart visual acuity, fundus color photography and optical coherence tomography (OCT). Among the 24 eyes with recordable visual acuity, 17 eyes has initial visual acuity≥0.1 (0.45±0.20) and 7 eyes with initial visual acuity ranged from light perception to hand movement. The vitreous opacities and (or) subretinal yellowish-white lesions and retinal pigment epitheliumuplift were observed in all eyes. All eyes were treated with intravitreal methotrexate (4000 μg/ml, 0.1 ml) injections according to a induction-consolidation-maintenance regimen. For 26 treated eyes, each received an average of (11.5±6.3) injections. Twenty eyes had finished theintraocular chemotherapy, while 6 eyes had not. Eight of 20 eyes were clinically confirmed free of tumor cells by diagnostic vitrectomy, 12 eyes were still with tumor cell involvement.The follow-up was ranged from 2 to 48 months, the mean time was 18 months. The examination of BCVA, fundus color photography and OCT were performed. No tumor cell was defined as clinical remission. Visual acuity was scored as improved or declined obviously (improved or declined 2 lines) or mild improved or declined (changed within 2 lines). ResultsTwenty eyes achieved clinical remission after (3.5±3.6) injections, 12 eyes of 20 eyes with tumor cell involvement before chemotherapy achieved clinical remission after (5.8±3.0) injections. The mean visual acuity of seventeen eyes with initial visual acuity 0.1 in induction phase and at the end of treatment were 0.36±0.23 and 0.56±0.20, respectively. Compared with before treatment, the visual acuity was mild declined in induction phase (t=1.541, P>0.05), but mild improved at the end of treatment (t=2.639, P<0.05). The visual acuity at the end of treatment in 7 eyes with initial visual acuity<0.1 was ranged from no light perception to 0.1. Of 14 patients, 2 patients have been fatal because of brain lesions progression at 42 and 48 months after diagnosis of primary central nervous system lymphoma. No ocular recurrence was noted during the follow-up in 20 eyes who finished intraocular chemotherapy. ConclusionsPVRL patients can achieve clinical remission after (3.5±3.6) injections by intravitreal chemotherapy of methotrexate, and the visual acuity improved mildly. No ocular recurrence was found during follow-up.
ObjectiveTo observe the efficacy of dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX) combined with pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) in eyes with severe idiopathic epimacular membrane (IMEM). MethodsA prospective clinical case study. From December 2018 to May 2021, 24 patients with 25 eyes of severe IMEM diagnosed in Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital were included in the study. Among them, 7 males had 7 eyes, 17 females had 18 eyes. Age was 57 to 84 years old. The IMEM stage was 3 to 4 examined by spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). All eyes were performed best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) by SD-OCT. The patients were randomly divided into PPV group (11 eyes) and PPV+DEX group (14 eyes). Standard PPV by three-channel 25G was performed. Phacoemulsification, membrane stripping and intraocular lens implantation were combined during the operation. Patients received vitreous injection of 0.7 mg DEX in PPV+DEX group at the end of the operation. At 1 week, 1 month, 3 months and 6 months after operation, the same equipments and methods were used to perform relevant examinations. The changes of BCVA and CMT were compared between the two groups by t test. ResultsCompared with before operation, at 1, 3 and 6 months after operation, the BCVA of the eyes in the PPV+DEX group was significantly improved (t=3.974, 4.639, 4.453), CMT was significantly decreased (t=2.955, 3.722, 4.364), the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05); at 3 and 6 months after surgery, the BCVA of the eyes in the PPV group was significantly improved (t=2.983, 4.436), CMT was significantly decreased (t=2.983, 3.461), the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05). ConclusionIn the treatment of severe IMEM, DEX can accelerate the early postoperative visual recovery and reduce CMT.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of intravitreal injection (IVI) of expansile gas alone to treat idiopathic full-thickness macular hole (FTMH).MethodsThis is a prospective interventional case series. Twenty FTMH patients (26 eyes) who underwent IVI with expansile gas alone were enrolled in this study. There were 5 males (5 eyes) and 21 females (21 eyes), with the mean age of (59±12) years. All patients received the best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), slit lamp microscope, indirect ophthalmoscopy, fundus color photography and three-dimensional optical coherence tomography (OCT) examinations. The BCVA was measured using the international standard visual acuity chart, and the results were converted to the logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution visual acuity. The diameters of macular holes and the interface between vitreous and macular were observed by OCT (Topcon, OCT-2000). Based on the diameter, the holes were classified as small FTMH (equal or lesser than 250 μm), medium FTMH (more than 250 μm but equal or lesser than 400 μm) and large FTMH (more than 400 μm). The mean BCVA was 0.85±0.29. There were 7, 10 and 9 eyes with small, medium and large FTMH. There were 10 eyes with vitreous- macular traction (VMT). All the eyes received IVI of 0.2 ml C3F8 followed facedown positioning for 7-14 days. The follow-up ranged from 1 to 23 months. The BCVA, FTMH closure and complications were observed. If holes failed to close at 1 month after IVI, vitrectomy combined with internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling and C3F8 tamponade would be performed for these eyes.ResultsFTMHs was able to close in 17/26 eyes (65.4%) had hole closure, failed to close in 9 /26 eyes (34.6%). All 10 eyes with VMT achieved vitreous-macula separation after IVI of gas. The eyes failed in the closure initially with IVI of gas alone, all succeed with hole closure after vitrectomy combined with ILM peeling and C3F8 tamponade. The closure rate of small (6 eyes), medium (8 eyes) and large FTMH (3 eyes) was 85.7%, 80.0% and 33.3% respectively. The diameter of FTMHs in holes-closure eyes and failed-closure eyes was (307.8±122.8), (431.6±128.4) μm respectively, the difference was significant (t=?2.407, P=0.024). VMT was found in 6 eyes and 4 eyes in holes-closure group and failed-closure group, respectively, the difference was significant (t=?2.196, P=0.038). The mean preoperative BCVA was 0.51±0.36. There was a significant difference between pre-and postoperative BCVA (t=4.758, P＜0.05). Two eyes developed local retinal detachment, which achieved hole closure and retinal reattachment after vitrectomy.ConclusionIVI of expansile gas alone is an effective way in treating FTMH with a diameter smaller than 400 μm and with VMT before surgery.
Primary vitreoretinal lymphoma (PVRL) is a rare type of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma with poor prognosis and the optimal treatment has yet to be determined. Its treatment has evolved from enucleation to ocular radiotherapy, systemic chemotherapy and intravitreal chemotherapy. Radiotherapy can effectively eradicate tumor cells but ocular recurrences are common. Systemic chemotherapy has become the mainstream option but there are problems with only-partial response of PVRL and high rate of recurrence. Intravitreal chemotherapy, primarily used as adjunctive to systemic chemotherapy, has achieved high remission rate and low rate of recurrence as well as with limited ocular complications. The tumor cells were cleared and the visual function preserved. However, issues about the drug applied, treatment protocols and goals of intravitreal chemotherapy, whether for visual preservation or survival improvement, are worthy for further study.
Nowadays, one of the most challenging aspects of retinoblastoma (RB) therapy is how to control the resistant or recurrent viable vitreous seeds, for which intravenous chemotherapy appears to be ineffective. Recently, intravitreal chemotherapy offers another option to control advanced stage and vitreous seeds of RB, and may be a promising new approach to RB therapy. However, intravitreal injection for RB patients raises considerable controversy due to concerns of possible extraocular extension along the injection route, and should not replace the primary standard of care for bilateral RB or group E eyes of RB. Close follow-up and further studies are needed to determine appropriate indications, to determine the effective drugs and concentrations, to optimize RB therapy protocols and to investigate the relationship between long-term efficacy and toxicities.