Intravitreal Steroid Injection Research Articles

Early adoption of triamcinolone acetonide suprachoroidal injection for uveitic macular edema: a physician survey

ObjectiveTo obtain physicians’ “real-world” perspectives on early experiences with triamcinolone acetonide suprachoroidal injection (SCS-TA) for treatment of patients with uveitic macular edema (UME).ResultsTwelve retina/uveitis specialists in the United States were surveyed about SCS-TA injection procedure and patient outcomes. Survey participants administered ≥ 291 SCS-TA injections to 243 patients with UME with various disease characteristics (etiologies, chronicity, and anatomical subtypes). Commonly reported reasons for SCS-TA adoption included potential for lowering the risk of steroid-associated intraocular pressure elevations versus intravitreal injections or implants (100%), potential for longer duration of action versus intravitreal steroid injections or implants (92%), and desire to use a new delivery modality (83%). Nearly all participants (92%) found injection procedure relatively easy post-training, with most (75%) procedurally comfortable after completing 2–5 injections. 58% of participants indicated that their patients gained 2–3 lines of vision by first follow-up visit, and 92% reported having patients who experienced 100–150 μm or greater reduction in central subfield thickness. Overall, 92% of participants were satisfied with SCS-TA treatment outcomes. Findings from this survey of early adopters of SCS-TA indicate that the suprachoroidal injection technique was easy to learn and resulted in favorable patient outcomes consistent with clinical trial data.

Immediate response to intravitreal treatment for macular edema due to diabetes and retinal vein occlusion.

To objectively assess the immediate response to intravitreal treatment for macular edema and compare it across different agents. This retrospective, comparative study included patients with macular edema due to diabetic retinopathy (DME) or vein occlusion who were treated with intravitreal injections of either steroids (triamcinolone acetonide or dexamethasone sustained release implant) or anti-vascular endothelial growth factor antibodies (VEGF). The central retinal thickness (CRT) and the best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were measured 1 day after the injection and compared with immediate pre-injection values. There were 79 eyes (57 patients) including 51 eyes with DME, 18 with branch retinal vein occlusion edema (BRVO-ME), and 10 eyes with central retinal vein occlusion edema (CRVO-ME). The intravitreal agents were triamcinolone acetonide (TA)(n = 15), dexamethasone sustained release implant (DEX)(n = 22), ranibizumab (n = 19), and bevacizumab (n = 23). Statistically significant improvement in CRT was seen in all injection groups (p < 0.05) while improvement in mean BCVA was significant only in the TA group (p = 0.009). The mean change in CRT was maximum with steroids than with anti-VEGFs; viz. 159.47 µ in TA, 115.45 µ in DEX, 86.10 µ in ranibizumab, and 78.78 µ in bevacizumab group. Least amount of change was noted in the spongy type of macular edema (18.73 µ) while improvement in mean BCVA was statistically significant only in the cystoid group (p = 0.01). Comparatively, steroid agents showed better immediate response to therapy than anti-VEGFs. Maximum reduction in central retinal thickness was seen following triamcinolone acetonide injection. Cystoid edema showed better immediate response than spongy retinal thickening.

Outcomes of Eyes Lost to Follow-up After Treatment With Intraocular or Periocular Steroid Injections.

Purpose: To evaluate the visual, intraocular pressure (IOP), and anatomic outcomes of eyes with loss to follow-up (LTFU) after intravitreal or periocular steroid injections. Methods: Patients receiving intraocular or periocular steroid injections and with LTFU for at least 180 days were included in this retrospective cohort study. Charts were reviewed for the visual acuity (VA), IOP, and central foveal thickness at the visit before LTFU, the first return visit, and 3, 6, and 12 months after return. Results: Fifty-three eyes of 47 patients were identified. The mean (±SD) age was 62.3 ± 14.9 years, the mean LTFU time was 295 ± 181.2 days (range, 182-1101), and the mean follow-up after return was 354 ± 339.3 days (range, 32-1141). The overall mean number of steroid injections was 5.2 ± 3.9 (range, 1-18). Compared with the mean logMAR VA at the visit before LTFU (0.59 [Snellen 20/77]), the mean VA remained stable at all timepoints after return as follows: return visit (0.62 [20/83]; P = .6), month 3 (0.55 [20/70]; P = .6), month 6 (0.55 [20/70]; P = .5), month 12 (0.64 [20/87]; P = .6), and final visit (0.69 [20/97]; P = .2). At the first return visit, 8 (15%) of 53 patients had an IOP of 21 mm Hg or higher (range, 21-31); 2 required treatment with a new antihypertensive medication (latanoprost and timolol, respectively). Conclusions: Patients with LTFU after receiving steroid injections maintained their VA. No patient required incisional glaucoma surgery. Compared with other etiologies, eyes with diabetic macular edema had a greater increase in IOP.

Raised Intraocular Pressure Secondary to Vitreoretinal Procedures: A Literature Review

The anatomical proximity of anterior and posterior segment structures and the familiar microcirculatory milieu make both susceptible to arduous complications when either is surgically handled. Because of the complex haemodynamic reciprocity between vitreous, retina, choroid, and aqueous humour, any trivial alteration in one can present a catastrophic consequence in the other. A good number of evidence.based studies have already substantiated that postoperative rise in intraocular pressure (IOP) is a well-recognised complication after vitreoretinal surgeries like scleral buckling, pars plana vitrectomy (PPV), intravitreal gas and silicon oil injection as well as intravitreal steroid and antivascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injection. The cause is multifactorial. Determining the cardinal pathophysiological mechanism is very decisive as it provides the ultimate guide to opting for the suitable treatment modality. The superimposing clinical features mystify the diagnosis, and pre.existing conjunctival scars and episcleral explants make any further surgical management very tough. In many cases, anti-glaucoma medications are beneficial for managing the temporary rise in IOP. However, the options of laser treatment and filtration surgeries can be considered in resistant cases, and glaucoma drainage devices are the last resort for refractory patients where filtration surgeries fail. In this review, we provide fundamental insight into the possible pathogenic mechanisms, specifically focusing on how to discriminate among them and strategically approach the management with secondary elevation in IOP following vitreoretinal surgeries.

Incident glaucoma and ocular hypertension after periocular and intravitreal steroid injections: a claims-based analysis

Background/aimsThis study aims to determine the incidence and risk of open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension (OHT) following ocular steroid injections using healthcare claims data.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed deidentified insurance claims data...

Noninfectious Outcomes of Intravitreal Antibiotic Steroid Injection and Topical Nonsteroidal Antiinflammatory Drugs Versus Triple Drop Therapy After Cataract Surgery

To compare noninfectious outcomes of intravitreal antibiotic steroid (IVAS) injection (moxifloxacin-triamcinolone) and postoperative topical nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAID) with a standard 3-drop therapy (TDT) regimen (topical antibiotic, steroid, and NSAID) in patients after cataract surgery. Retrospective comparative clinical cohort study. In 3 study centers in the United States, a total of 2143 eyes (N = 2143 patients) underwent cataract surgery with IVAS-NSAID or TDT between 2017 and 2022. Preoperative data were included, including patients' age, iris color, medical history, and ocular history. Postoperative data, including best-corrected visual acuity, intraocular pressure (IOP), and the need for IOP-lowering medications, were recorded at 1-week, 1-month, and 6-month time points. The primary outcome measures were postoperative complications, defined as persistent anterior chamber inflammation, persistent corneal edema (PCE), rebound inflammation, and cystoid macular edema, were compared between the 2 groups. There were 1079 eyes in the IVAS-NSAID group and 1064 eyes in the TDT group. Best-corrected visual acuity and IOP were similar between IVAS-NSAID and TDT eyes at all time points. A portion (11.6%) of TDT eyes experienced postoperative complications compared with 6.5% in IVAS-NSAID eyes (P < .001). Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery was associated with increased rates of PCE in IVAS-NSAID eyes, and eyes with dark irides had a higher incidence of cystoid macular edema, PCE, and rebound inflammation in the IVAS-NSAID group. The IVAS-NSAID regimen overall had similar postoperative outcomes and fewer complications compared with the TDT regimen. IVAS-NSAID may be considered a safe alternative to topical regimens in non-femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery and patients with light irides.

Next-Generation Nanomedicine Approaches for the Management of Retinal Diseases.

Retinal diseases are one of the leading causes of blindness globally. The mainstay treatments for these blinding diseases are laser photocoagulation, vitrectomy, and repeated intravitreal injections of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) or steroids. Unfortunately, these therapies are associated with ocular complications like inflammation, elevated intraocular pressure, retinal detachment, endophthalmitis, and vitreous hemorrhage. Recent advances in nanomedicine seek to curtail these limitations, overcoming ocular barriers by developing non-invasive or minimally invasive delivery modalities. These modalities include delivering therapeutics to specific cellular targets in the retina, providing sustained delivery of drugs to avoid repeated intravitreal injections, and acting as a scaffold for neural tissue regeneration. These next-generation nanomedicine approaches could potentially revolutionize the treatment landscape of retinal diseases. This review describes the availability and limitations of current treatment strategies and highlights insights into the advancement of future approaches using next-generation nanomedicines to manage retinal diseases.

Delayed onset Cutibacterium (formerly Propionibecterium) acnes endophthalmitis triggered by intravitreal steroid injection.

We report a case of delayed onset Cutibacterium acnes (C. acnes, formerly Propionibacterium acnes or P. acnes) endophthalmitis with onset triggered by intravitreal steroid (triamcinolone acetonide; TA) injection in a pseudophakic patient, 7 years after cataract surgery.Methods/Patients: A 67 years old, male presented with gradual worsening of vision, eye redness and photosensitivity that started a month after intravitreal TA injection (Triescience, 4mg/0.1mL, Alcon Labs, Fort Worth, TX) for cystoid macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion in the right eye. Patient had undergone cataract surgery with intraocular lens (IOL) in that eye 7 years prior. Exam showed visual acuity of counting fingers at 3 feet, conjunctival injection, with 2+ anterior chamber cell and 2+ vitreous haze. Uveitis work up including Angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE), Quantiferon Gold, and syphilis IgG screen was negative. Diagnostic pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with intravitreal injection of antibiotics was performed and vitreous sample was sent for detailed laboratory analysis. Vitreous fluid analysis was positive for C. acnes and negative for viral, fungal and malignant cells. Although the patient received intravitreal antibiotics injection twice, the intraocular infection and inflammation persisted which eventually required an IOL and capsular bag removal, followed by insertion of a secondary IOL later. Delayed onset C. acnes endophthalmitis may be triggered by an intravitreal steroid injection in pseudophakic patients.

Ocular Manifestations of Diabetes Mellitus: It’s Remedies and Prevention

Diabetes mellitus which is a multi systemic disease is a common public health problem which can affect children, young people, adults and older people due to uncontrolled hyperglycemia. Ocular and other systemic complications of diabetes are becoming the most significant cause of visual impairment and other morbidities and are either preventable or curable with early detection and prompt treatment. Its prevalence is increasing globally with sight threatening ocular manifestations. The most of the published articles highlighted that the common ocular manifestations were diabetic retinopathy, snow flake cataract, primary open angle glaucoma, corneal lesions, recurrent stye, Chalazion and extraocular muscle palsies. Treatment options for diabetic retinopathy are laser photocoagulation and intravitreal injection of steroids. Expert opinion is always required in a case with glaucoma, cataract, optic nerve disorders and cranial nerve palsies. Control of blood sugar level, proper nutrition and adequate physical exercise and periodic eye examination can play a crucial role for its prevention.

TELANGIECTATIC CAPILLARIES CAUSING PERSISTENT DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA SUCCESSFULLY TREATED BY PHOTODYNAMIC THERAPY.

To report two cases of persistent macular edema caused by the exudation of diabetic telangiectatic capillaries (TelCaps), which have been successfully treated with photodynamic therapy (PDT). Review of data from two patients suffering from persistent macular edema caused by parafoveolar TelCaps. In both cases, conventional laser was impossible because TelCaps were to close from foveal center. The use of focal PDT on perifoveolar TelCaps permitted to reduce persistent macular edema and to avoid inefficient intravitreal anti-vascular epithelial growth factor or steroid injections. In both cases, visual acuity was fully restored four to six months after PDT. Central macular thickness was also normalized in the first case and significantly reduced in the second case. In both cases, visual gain was sustained throughout the whole follow-up period (2 and 1 year, respectively). Photodynamic therapy can be helpful to treat diabetic macular edema caused by TelCaps nonresponding to approved intravitreal therapy or for which conventional laser is contraindicated.

Intravitreal Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant for Radiation Retinopathy: Report of Preliminary Findings.

To assess the efficacy of a 0.18 mg intravitreal fluocinolone acetonide (FA) implant (Yutiq, EyePoint Pharmaceuticals, Watertown, MA) as a treatment option for patients with radiation retinopathy-related cystoid macular edema (CME). A retrospective review of 7 patients treated for uveal melanoma who developed radiation retinopathy-related CME. They were initially treated with intravitreal anti-VEGF and/or steroid injections and then transitioned to intravitreal FA implant. Primary outcomes include BCVA, central subfield thickness (CST), and number of additional injections. After FA implant insertion, BCVA and CST remained stable in all patients. The variance in BCVA decreased from 75.5 ETDRS letters (range 0-199 letters) to 29.8 (range 1.2-134) following FA implant insertion. Mean CST was 384 μm (range 165-641) and 354 μm (range 282-493) before and after FA implant insertion, resulting in a 30 μm mean reduction. The number of intravitreal injections (average 4.9, range 2-10) decreased following intravitreal FA implant insertion with only two patients requiring one additional FA implant (average 0.29, range 0-1) over a mean of 12.1 months (range 0.9-18.5) follow-up. Intravitreal FA implant is an effective treatment for CME radiation retinopathy. The slow release of steroid allows for sustained control of macular edema, which correlated with stable visual acuity and decreased injection burden for patients.

REal-world treatment outcomes after delayed intRavitreal therapy in center-involving diabetic macular edema – RETORT study

PurposeTo compare real-life data on delayed intravitreal treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) patients to early treatment.MethodsIn this single-centre, retrospective, interventional, comparative study, DME patients were divided into two groups based on when they received treatment: Group 1 - received treatment within 24 weeks and Group 2 - at or after 24 weeks from the time of treatment advice. Visual acuity and central subfield thickness (CSFT) changes were compared at various time points. Reasons for delaying treatment were noted.ResultsThe study included 109 (Group 1–94; Group 2–15) eyes. When treatment was advised, demographic profile, diabetes duration, glucose control and VA between two groups were comparable. At this point, CSFT was higher in Group 1 than in Group 2 (p = 0.036). At injection time, Group 2 had better VA and lower CSFT than Group 1 (p < 0.05). Group 2’s VA (53.4 ± 12.67) was significantly lower than Group 1’s (57.38 ± 20.01) after 1-year treatment. At 1-year, CSFT decreased in Group 1 and increased in Group 2. Group 1 had mean improvement of + 7.6 letters and Group 2 had a decline of -6.9 letters. Group 2 required more intravitreal anti-VEGF (median – 3; IQR: 2–4), steroid injections (median – 4; IQR: 2–4) and focal laser sessions (median – 4; IQR: 2–4).ConclusionLate-treated DME eyes needed more injections and focal laser sessions than early treated eyes. Adherence to early treatment of DME in real-life will help prevent long-term vision loss.

Three year outcomes of intravitreal ranibizumab and aflibercept treatment of patients with diabetic macular edema: A comparative study.

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is the most common cause of visual deterioration in patients with diabetes mellitus. Various treatment options have been used for DME, including intravitreal injection of steroids and anti-vascular endothelial growth factors. To evaluate and compare the functional and anatomical outcomes of intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) and intravitreal aflibercept (IVA) treatments in patients with DME. Retrospective study. Four hundred three eyes of 235 naïve patients who underwent IVR or IVA treatment for DME followed up to 36 months included in the study. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) were measured at baseline, year 1, 2 and 3. Primary endpoint of the study was the change in BCVA and CMT each year from baseline and requirement of additional treatment (laser/steroid injection). There were 198 eyes in IVR group and 205 eyes in IVA group. The changes in mean BCVA were 0.09 ± 0.32 versus 0.17 ± 0.41 Logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) (p = 0.042) at year 1, 0.09 ± 0.37 versus 0.12 ± 0.45 logMAR (p = 0.512) at year 2 and 0.13 ± 0.36 versus 0.15 ± 0.48 logMAR (p = 0.824) at year 3 in IVA and IVR groups, respectively. The baseline mean BCVA were lower (p = 0.004) in IVA group. The mean total number of injections was 7.93 ± 3.38 versus 7.42 ± 3.05 (p = 0.112). At year 1, change in mean BCVA was statistically significantly higher in IVA group; however this difference did not persist at years 2 and 3. Although the mean total number of injections was similar between groups, the requirement for adjuvant steroid treatment was significantly higher in ranibizumab group, which may affect the number of visits and treatment costs. Both ranibizumab and aflibercept treatments achieved a good long-term visual and anatomical response in DME patients.

Bilateral Extensive Syphilitic Punctate Inner Retinitis Triggering Macular Ischemia after Intravitreal Triamcinolone Injections

Purpose: To report a case of extensive syphilitic punctate inner retinitis (SPIR) triggering bilateral macular ischemia after intravitreal triamcinolone injections, and the multimodal retinal imaging findings.Case summary: A 69-year-old male patient with nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy was transferred to our hospital because of bilateral visual deterioration (to counting fingers) after the first intravitreal triamcinolone injection. Fundus examination revealed numerous yellow punctate precipitates in the superficial retinae, retinal arteriolitis, and vitritis. The punctate lesions and surrounding retinal regions showed decreased vascular density on optical coherence tomography angiography, and focal hypofluorescence on fluorescein angiography. The patient was positive for all of the Venereal Disease Research Laboratory test, the fluorescent treponemal antibody-absorption test, and &lt;i&gt;Treponema pallidum&lt;/i&gt; hemagglutination; we diagnosed bilateral SPIR. After treatment with aqueous crystalline penicillin solutions (24 million units per day for 14 days), the punctate lesions reduced but arteriolitis progressed to obliterative vasculitis. After 6 months, the bilateral SPIR and vitritis resolved, and the bilateral visual acuity improved to 20/100. However, inner retinal and macular ischemia persisted because of capillary nonperfusion attributable to obliterative vasculitis.Conclusions: Extensive SPIR can develop after an initial intravitreal steroid injection; the inner retinal ischemia and visual loss may persist after treatment because obliterative vasculitis develops. Therefore, patients scheduled for intravitreal steroid injections should be screened for syphilis infection.

Glaucoma Drainage Device Erosions in Patients Receiving Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapy for Diabetic Retinopathy.

To determine if intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections are associated with an increased risk of glaucoma drainage device (GDD) erosions. A retrospective chart review was conducted including patients with diabetic retinopathy and had a GDD implanted at a large academic institution. The rate of GDD erosions was compared between eyes that did or did not receive intravitreal anti-VEGF injections. A subanalysis was also performed the relationship between diabetic macular edema (DME) and intravitreal steroid injections and GDD erosions. A total of 677 eyes from 608 patients was included. A total of 447 eyes received at least one anti-VEGF injection; 230 eyes never received such therapy. Twenty eyes (4.5%) receiving anti-VEGF had at least one erosion event, compared to 7 eyes (3.0%) of patients not receiving anti-VEGF therapy (OR 1.49, p=0.37). Diabetic macular edema was associated with a significantly increased rate of erosion in eyes not receiving anti-VEGF (71.4% versus 31.4%, p=0.034), but not in eyes receiving anti-VEGF (30.0% versus 40.7%, p=0.34). Receiving more than one specific anti-VEGF agent, an increased frequency or total number of anti-VEGF injections, or receiving intravitreal steroids were not associated with an increased risk of erosion (p>0.05). In patients with diabetic retinopathy, the use of anti-VEGF does not result in an increased rate of GDD erosions or recurrent erosions. Further research is needed over a longer follow-up period to determine if longer or more frequent anti-VEGF treatment is a risk factor for recurrent erosions.

CLINICAL OUTCOMES OF PATIENTS WITH ENDOPHTHALMITIS AFTER DEXAMETHASONE INTRAVITREAL IMPLANT.

To report a case series of endophthalmitis associated with intravitreal dexamethasone injections in a single practice and to discuss the clinical findings and visual outcomes of each case. All endophthalmitis cases following intravitreal dexamethasone injections performed from January 1, 2014 to October 20, 2020 were identified using Wills Eye/MidAtlantic billing records. The diagnosis, clinical information, and microbiology were confirmed for each case. Data were analyzed using Excel (Microsoft Excel, Redmond, WA). Four cases of endophthalmitis were identified from 3,925 intravitreal dexamethasone injections in a single practice and one case was referred from an outside institution, resulting in an incidence of 0.102% (1 in 981 injections). Mean age was 82.3 years (range, 63-88 years) with a mean of 11.3 intravitreal dexamethasone injections performed (range, 2-30 injections) before endophthalmitis. Cases presented with endophthalmitis a mean (SD) of 3.6 (1.64) days after causative injection. Three cases grew gram-positive organisms. All patients responded to intravitreal antibiotics. Mean logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution visual acuity at causative injection, endophthalmitis presentation, 3 months, and last follow-up was 0.44 (20/55), 2.22 (20/3,319), 1.18 (20/303), and 1.46 (20/577), respectively. Endophthalmitis following intravitreal steroid injections may occur more frequently than other intravitreal injections. Dexamethasone-attributed endophthalmitis remains uncommon, and prompt intravitreal antibiotic treatment seems to be effective in this series.

Letrozole-induced bilateral acute intermediate uveitis with cystoid macular edema

The purpose is to report a rare case of letrozole-induced bilateral acute intermediate uveitis (IU) with cystoid macular edema (CME). A 29 years old female undergoing infertility treatment came with complaints of progressive diminution of vision in both eyes. Clinical evaluation and optical coherence tomography (OCT) revealed IU with CME in both eyes. Intravitreal steroid injections and discontinuation of oral letrozole led to the resolution of IU with CME. Thus, all patients who are treated with letrozole should undergo periodic ophthalmic screening for timely diagnosis and treatment.

Clinical Characteristics and Long-term Outcomes in Diabetic Macular Edema Patients: With or without Additional Injection Following Ranibizumab Loading

PurposeTo investigate the baseline characteristics in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) during 7 years according to the need for additional treatments after intravitreal ranibizumab (RBZ) loading injections.MethodsThe medical records of 32 patients treated with intravitreal RBZ loading for DME during 7 years were reviewed. After three-consecutive monthly RBZ injections, additional treatment was decided according to the patient’s response to RBZ loading. Based on whether the patients received treatment with or without additional injections, including intravitreal antivascular endothelial factor or steroid injection, they were divided into the “no add (NA)” or “add” groups, respectively. The baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), macular volume (MV), central subfoveal thickness, and other clinical factors were analyzed, and their 7-year changes were compared between the two groups.ResultsThe BCVA of the NA group was better than that of the add group at 2, 3, 5, and 7 years (year 2, 3, and 5; p < 0.01, respectively). Baseline MV was significantly smaller in the NA group than in the add group (10.72 ± 0.88 μm vs. 11.98 ± 1.64 μm, p = 0.008). The DME duration before treatment in the NA group was significantly shorter than in the add group (1.03 ± 0.98 years vs. 1.91 ± 1.33 years, p = 0.042). The proportion of patients with serous retinal detachment or cystic macular edema was significantly lower in the NA group than in the add group (35.3% vs. 73.3%, p = 0.042). The NA group had smaller MV until 2 years than the add group (year 1, p = 0.002; year 2, p = 0.006).ConclusionsThe DME patients without additional treatments during 7 years after the initial loading treatment had shorter duration of DME and diffuse retinal thickening morphologic type with lower MV at baseline, and better long-term visual prognosis.

Cardiovascular and Mortality Risk with Intravitreal Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Inhibitors in Patients with Diabetic Retinopathy

To investigate the cardiovascular (CV) safety associated with intravitreal anti-VEGF injections (IAVIs) in patients with diabetic retinopathy (DR). Population-based cohort study using Medicare and 2 commercial insurance claims databases in the United States from January 2009 to December2017. Patients with DR aged ≥ 18 years in whom treatment with either IVAIs or laser procedure or intravitreal steroid injections was initiated. We estimated the propensity score (PS) using multivariable logistic regression models, including 85 baseline covariates and PS-matched patients in a 1:1 ratio. We estimated the pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses based on prior history of CV events were also conducted. A composite CV outcome of myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke, its individual components, and all-cause mortality in 180 and 365 days after treatment initiation. We identified 61 508 PS-matched patients in a 1:1 ratio in whom either IVAIs or laser or steroid treatment was initiated. Compared with laser or steroid treatment, IAVIs were not associated with an increased risk of the composite CV outcome (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.83-1.09), MI (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.76-1.13), or stroke (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.80-1.19) or the risk of all-cause mortality (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.97-1.62) at 180 days of follow-up. At 365 days, the risk of the composite CV outcome, stroke, and MI remained similar between the 2 groups, although the risk of all-cause mortality was increased with IAVIs (HR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.14-1.60). The subgroup analysis showed that the risk of all-cause mortality was increased in patients with a prior history of CV events. Among > 60 000 patients with DR, those who received IAVIs had a risk of CV events similar to those who received laser or steroid treatment. However, the risk of all-cause mortality was higher in patients who received IAVIs for DR.

Potential Prognostic Indicators for Patients With Retinal Vein Occlusion.

The second most prevalent cause of retinal vascular disease is retinal vein occlusion (RVO). RVO raises intravascular pressure in the capillary and veins, triggering vessel barrier collapse and subsequent leaking of blood or plasma components into the tissue (edema). Macular edema (ME) is a major complication of RVO that results in significant visual impairment. Laser therapy, intravitreal steroid injections, and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors are the major therapeutic techniques. Different therapies reduce ME of RVO and improve visual activity. However, some people have no impact on the resolution of ME, while others have a poor visual prognosis despite full ME cure. There are many investigators who studied the relationship between indicators of various instruments with visual activity. However, a summary of those findings is currently lacking. Therefore, we will focus on the predictive factors of different studies associated with positive visual activity outcomes, which would be very useful and important to help address both treatment expectations and methods for patients with RVO.