Intravitreal Steroids Research Articles

Comparative assessment of intravitreal steroid implant with combination therapy for diabetic macular edema.

Comparative assessment of intravitreal steroid implant with combination therapy for diabetic macular edema.

Pseudophakic cystoid macular edema.

Pseudophakic cystoid macular edema (PCME) is the most common postoperative complication of cataract surgery, resulting in visual decline. In this review, we discuss its pathophysiology, epidemiology, clinical presentation, and the current available evidence on therapeutic management. Patients with diabetes mellitus have twice the risk of developing PCME as compared to nondiabetic individuals. Recent large database studies have revealed an increased risk among young, male, and black patients. A previous history of PCME is perhaps the strongest risk factor for fellow eye involvement. PCME generally occurs around 6 weeks postoperatively and is likely a consequence of postoperative inflammation with disruption of the blood-queous and blood-retina barriers. Optical coherence tomography of the macula servers as a key diagnostic tool. There is a lack of large controlled clinical trials to guide treatment approaches. We recommend a stepwise approach for PCME that includes observation if not visually significant versus treatment with topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and steroids if symptomatic. Refractory cases can be treated with a periocular steroid injection, followed by intravitreal steroids if still nonresponsive.

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.

Patient-Centered Economic Burden of Diabetic Macular Edema: Retrospective Cohort Study.

Diabetic macular edema (DME), a leading cause of blindness, requires treatment with costly drugs, such as anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents. The prolonged use of these effective but expensive drugs results in an incremental economic burden for patients with DME compared with those with diabetes mellitus (DM) without DME. However, there are no studies on the long-term patient-centered economic burden of DME after reimbursement for anti-VEGFs. This retrospective cohort study aims to estimate the 3-year patient-centered economic burden of DME compared with DM without DME, using the Common Data Model. We used medical data from 1,903,603 patients (2003-2020), transformed and validated using the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model from Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. We defined the group with DME as patients aged >18 years with nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy and intravitreal anti-VEGF or steroid prescriptions. As control, we defined the group with DM without DME as patients aged >18 years with DM or diabetic retinopathy without intravitreal anti-VEGF or steroid prescriptions. Propensity score matching, performed using a regularized logistic regression with a Laplace prior, addressed selection bias. We estimated direct medical costs over 3 years categorized into total costs, reimbursement costs, nonreimbursement costs, out-of-pocket costs, and costs covered by insurance, as well as healthcare resource utilization. An exponential conditional model and a count model estimated unbiased incremental patient-centered economic burden using generalized linear models and a zero-inflation model. In a cohort of 454 patients with DME matched with 1640 patients with DM, the economic burden of DME was significantly higher than that of DM, with total costs over 3 years being 2.09 (95% CI 1.78-2.47) times higher. Reimbursement costs were 1.89 (95% CI 1.57-2.28) times higher in the group with DME than with the group with DM, while nonreimbursement costs were 2.54 (95% CI 2.12-3.06) times higher. Out-of-pocket costs and costs covered by insurance were also higher by a factor of 2.11 (95% CI 1.58-2.59) and a factor of 2.01 (95% CI 1.85-2.42), respectively. Patients with DME had a significantly higher number of outpatient (1.87-fold) and inpatient (1.99-fold) visits compared with those with DM (P<.001 in all cases). Patients with DME experience a heightened economic burden compared with diabetic patients without DME. The substantial and enduring economic impact observed in real-world settings underscores the need to alleviate patients' burden through preventive measures, effective management, appropriate reimbursement policies, and the development of innovative treatments. Strategies to mitigate the economic impact of DME should include proactive approaches such as expanding anti-VEGF reimbursement criteria, approving and reimbursing cost-effective drugs such as bevacizumab, advocating for proactive eye examinations, and embracing early diagnosis by ophthalmologists facilitated by cutting-edge methodologies such as artificial intelligence for patients with DM.

Injectable Intravitreal Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant for Chronic Postoperative CME in the Presence of Silicone Oil Tamponade

Purpose: This report describes the use of the injectable intravitreal fluocinolone acetonide 0.18mg implant (FAI) for chronic postoperative cystoid macular edema (CME) in an eye with a silicone oil-filled vitreous cavity. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed including surgical, clinical, and imaging data. Results: The patient had multiple complicated vitreoretinal surgical procedures including long-term silicone oil tamponade. The eye developed chronic CME, which responded to intravitreal steroid therapies and subsequently received FAI for longer-term control. The eye had no complications related to FAI. Conclusion: FAI is a long-acting steroid that may be beneficial in controlling chronic CME. It can be considered for use in eyes with silicone oil tamponade, but further studies are required to better understand the pharmacokinetics and utility of the FAI when injected into silicone oil-filled vitreous cavities.

Management of diabetic retinopathy in pregnancy

Introduction The onset and development of diabetic retinopathy are more common during pregnancy. Pregnancy has no long-term effect on diabetic retinopathy; however, in 50-70% of cases, changes in retinopathy continues. The probability of worsening is highest in the second trimester and up to one year postpartum. Additional factors that have been associated with disease progression include duration of diabetes, the degree of retinopathy at the time of conception, management of hyperglycemia, anemia, and development of associated hypertension. In cases of severe non-proliferative retinopathy, it is recommended to promptly initiate laser photocoagulation rather than wait for early proliferative changes. Maintaining good diabetic control before and during pregnancy can help prevent disease progression and serious vision loss. Material and methods Diabetic retinopathy management in pregnancy was the subject of a comprehensive review of the scientific and medical literature. A structured search was performed in the PubMed, Scopus and HINARI databases, considering relevant articles published in the last 10 years. The search terms used (in English) were: „Diabetic retinopathy”; „pregnancy”; „laser photocoagulation”; „intravitreal steroids”; „anti-vascular endothelial growth factor”. Results It is suggested that women with diabetes receive pre-conception and post-pregnancy counselling from a multidisciplinary team including an ophthalmologist, endocrinologist, and perinatologist, as diabetic retinopathy may worsen during pregnancy. The risk of progression of the disease and the importance of appropriate metabolic control before and during pregnancy should be clearly explained to the patient. Careful monitoring is required in patients with advanced gestation, significant retinopathy, concomitant hypertension, and nephropathy. Conclusion The risk of retinopathy development may increase during pregnancy. Serious effects can arise for both the mother and the fetus, even though retinopathy is not common during pregnancy. It is possible to avoid significant retinopathy by carefully planning a young diabetic woman's pregnancy and proceeding promptly to laser photocoagulate in cases of severe non-proliferative retinopathy. A tendency for regress is frequently seen in diabetic retinopathy during the post-natal period. Subsequent pregnancies do not significantly increase the risk of progression if the retinopathy is stable before pregnancy.

Occlusive retinal vasculitis associated with intravitreal Faricimab injections

PurposeWe describe a case of occlusive vasculitis associated with intravitreal Faricimab (Vabysmo) injections.MethodsA retrospective case report.ResultsA 52-year old man treated with monthly Faricimab injections for diabetic macula oedema presented with sudden reduced vision, new retinal hemorrhages, significant retinal vascular occlusions and ischemia. After screening for differential diagnoses was unremarkable, the patient was treated with oral and intravitreal steroid therapy under which the occlusive vasculitis was stabilized.ConclusionOcclusive vasculitis, though rare, is a potential complication of Faricimab therapy. Comprehensive reporting and large-scale analyses are essential to better understand and manage this adverse event.

Intravitreal Antibiotics versus Early Vitrectomy plus Intravitreal Antibiotics for Post-Injection Endophthalmitis: an IRIS® Registry (Intelligent Research in Sight)

PurposeTo determine if intravitreal injection of antibiotics alone versus early pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) plus injection of intravitreal antibiotics predicted better or worse visual outcomes for patients with endophthalmitis after anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections. DesignRetrospective cohort study ParticipantsPatients developing endophthalmitis after receiving an intravitreal anti-VEGF injection from the American Academy of Ophthalmology IRIS® Registry between 2016 and 2020. MethodsInclusion criteria were endophthalmitis diagnosis within 1 to 28 days after anti-VEGF injection and a recorded visual acuity (VA) at baseline, on the day of diagnosis, and post-treatment. Patients in the Injection Only group underwent intravitreal injection of antibiotics alone and in the Early Vitrectomy group received PPV with intravitreal antibiotics or intravitreal injection followed by PPV within 2 days of diagnosis. Patients were excluded if they had cataract surgery during the study, intravitreal steroids before endophthalmitis, or intermediate/posterior uveitis or cystoid macular edema. The study created a 1:1 matched cohort using Mahalanobis Distance Matching, accounting for the differences in VA at baseline and diagnosis. Main Outcome MeasuresPost-treatment logMAR VA Results1,044 patients diagnosed with post-injection endophthalmitis met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. In the unmatched cohort, there were 935 patients in the Injection Only and 109 in the Early Vitrectomy group. In 1:1 matched cohort 218 patients (109 in each group) were included; the median logMAR VAs were 0.32 [20/40-20/50] at baseline, 0.88 [∼20/150] at diagnosis, and 0.57 [20/70-20/80] post-treatment. There were no statistically significant differences in the visual outcomes between the two matched treatment groups (b = 0.05, p = 0.23); including the subgroup of patients with VA worse than 1.0 logMAR (b = 0.05, p = 0.452). ConclusionsThere was no significant difference in final VA outcomes between patients receiving Injection Only and those treated with Early Vitrectomy for post-injection endophthalmitis. The findings support the use of either treatment strategy.

Subfoveal neurosensory detachment flattening and observe (SNF-Ob) approach for the management of Ci-DMO - a multicentric study.

To understand subfoveal neurosensory detachment flattening and observe (SNF-Ob) strategy and its relationship with visual acuity in the management of centre-involved diabetic macular oedema (Ci-DMO). This was a multicentric retrospective observational study. We reviewed data of 188 eyes of 130 patients who presented with Ci-DMO with subfoveal neurosensory detachment (NSD) and treated with intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents or steroids. The primary outcome was best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) measured at the time of the first subfoveal neurosensory detachment flattening (SNF) and at the end of follow-up. Eyes that achieved 20/50 (LogMAR = 0.40) or better at first SNF had mean LogMAR BCVA 0.38 ± 0.21, 0.24 ± 0.11 and 0.21 ± 0.15 at baseline, at the time of first SNF, and at the end of the last follow-up respectively. Mean LogMAR BCVA significantly improved from baseline to first SNF (p < 0.0001; 95% CI 0.115-0.183) and at the end of the last follow-up (p < 0.0001; 95% CI 0.126-0.213) with a change of Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) 10 letters. There was no significant difference in improvement in BCVA from the first SNF and at the end of the last follow-up (p = 0.0781; 95% CI -0.002 to 0.046). Eyes presenting with Ci-DMO and subfoveal NSD are unlikely to improve at SNF with BCVA > 20/50 (LogMAR = 0.40). Further evidence is needed before the combination of good BCVA and SNF may be considered as endpoint of pharmacological therapy for DMO.

Role of inflammation in a rat model of radiation retinopathy

Radiation retinopathy (RR) is a major side effect of ocular tumor treatment by plaque brachytherapy or proton beam therapy. RR manifests as delayed and progressive microvasculopathy, ischemia and macular edema, ultimately leading to vision loss, neovascular glaucoma, and, in extreme cases, secondary enucleation. Intravitreal anti-VEGF agents, steroids and laser photocoagulation have limited effects on RR. The role of retinal inflammation and its contribution to the microvascular damage occurring in RR remain incompletely understood. To explore cellular and vascular events after irradiation, we analyzed their time course at 1 week, 1 month and 6 months after rat eyes received 45 Gy X-beam photons. Müller glial cells, astrocytes and microglia were rapidly activated, and these markers of retinal inflammation persisted for 6 months after irradiation. This was accompanied by early cell death in the outer retina, which persisted at later time points, leading to retinal thinning. A delayed loss of small retinal capillaries and retinal hypoxia were observed after 6 months, indicating inner blood‒retinal barrier (BRB) alteration but without cell death in the inner retina. Moreover, activated microglial cells invaded the entire retina and surrounded retinal vessels, suggesting the role of inflammation in vascular alteration and in retinal cell death. Radiation also triggered early and persistent invasion of the retinal pigment epithelium by microglia and macrophages, contributing to outer BRB disruption. This study highlights the role of progressive and long-lasting inflammatory mechanisms in RR development and demonstrates the relevance of this rat model to investigate human pathology.

Childhood-Onset Non-Infectious Uveitis in the “Biologic Era”. Results From Spanish Multicenter Multidisciplinary Real-World Clinical Settings

ABSTRACT Objective To characterize and describe clinical experience with childhood-onset non-infectious uveitis. Study Design A multicenter retrospective multidisciplinary national web-based registry of 507 patients from 21 hospitals was analyzed. Cases were grouped as immune disease-associated (IMDu), idiopathic (IDIu) or ophthalmologically distinct. Characteristics of juvenile idiopathic arthritis-associated (non-HLA-B27-related) uveitis (JIAu), IDIu, and pars planitis (PP) were compared. Results IMDu (62.3%) and JIAu (51.9%) predominated in young females; and IDIu (22.7%) and PP (13.6%) in older children, without sex imbalance. Ocular complications occurred in 45.3% of cases (posterior synechiae [28%], cataracts [16%], band keratopathy [14%], ocular hypertension [11%] and cystoid macular edema [10%]) and were associated with synthetic (86%) and biologic (65%) disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) use. Subgroups were significantly associated (p < 0.05) with different characteristics. JIAu was typically anterior (98%), insidious (75%), in ANA-positive (69%), young females (82%) with fewer complications (31%), better visual outcomes, and later use of uveitis-effective biologics. In contrast, IDIu was characteristically anterior (87%) or panuveitic (12.1%), with acute onset (60%) and more complications at onset (59%: synechiae [31%] and cataracts [9.6%]) and less DMARD use, while PP is intermediate, and was mostly bilateral (72.5%), persistent (86.5%) and chronic (86.8%), with more complications (70%; mainly posterior segment and cataracts at last visit), impaired visual acuity at onset, and greater systemic (81.2%), subtenon (29.1%) and intravitreal (10.1%) steroid use. Conclusion Prognosis of childhood uveitis has improved in the “biologic era,” particularly in JIAu. Early referral and DMARD therapy may reduce steroid use and improve outcomes, especially in PP and IDIu.

Uveitic Macular Edema: Clinical Outcomes in Real-World Practice

ABSTRACT Purpose To examine the real-world management and outcomes of uveitic cystoid macular oedema (CME). Design Retrospective study. Methods Patients with uveitic CME were identified from the Inflammatory Eye Disease database. 248 eyes of 218 patients with uveitic CME were identified. Main Outcome Measures: Time to resolution, time to recurrence and vision loss. Results Median age at time of CME was 51.7 years [IQR 37.3–63.9]. Overall likelihood of resolution was 209/248 eyes (85.3%). Resolution occurred in 34.1% with topical therapy, 69.2% treated with oral prednisone (72.9% if prednisone dose ≥ 60 mg/day), 73.5% treated with orbital floor steroid, and 86.7% treated with intravitreal steroid. On multivariate analysis, ERM was associated with decreased resolution of CME (HR 0.735 p = 0.045). Additionally, infectious aetiology approached significance (HR 0.635 p = 0.059) for CME resolution. Recurrence occurred in 85 eyes (36.5%). Predictors of increased likelihood of recurrence were current smoking status (HR 1.818 p = 0.042) and subretinal fluid at diagnosis (HR 1.577 p = 0.043). Eyes with infectious aetiology had lower chance of CME resolution, but those that did resolve had lower probability of recurrence (HR 0.891 p = 0.019). Moderate vision loss (20/50–20/200) occurred in 24 eyes (9/7%) and severe vision loss (≤20/200) in 17 eyes (6.9%). Conclusions Management of CME is challenging given the heterogeneous aetiologies, severity of the macular edema as well as response to the therapy. A high rate of resolution was observed, given sufficient time, but recurrence occurs in one-third. Current smoking status plays an important role in the risk of recurrence of CME and patients should be encouraged to stop smoking.

Enhancing Diabetic Macular Edema Treatment Outcomes: Exploring the ESASO Classification and Structural OCT Biomarkers.

This study assessed the European School of Advanced Studies in Ophthalmology (ESASO) classification's prognostic value for diabetic macular edema (DME) in predicting intravitreal therapy outcomes. In this retrospective, multicenter study, patients aged > 50years with type 1 or 2 diabetes and DME received intravitreal antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents (ranibizumab, bevacizumab, and aflibercept) or steroids (dexamethasone). The primary outcome was visual acuity (VA) change post-treatment, termed as functional response, measured 4-6weeks post-third anti-VEGF or 12-16weeks post-steroid injection, stratified by initial DME stage. Of the 560 eyes studied (62% male, mean age 66.7years), 31% were classified as stage 1 (early), 50% stage 2 (advanced), 17% stage 3 (severe), and 2% stage 4 (atrophic). Visual acuity (VA; decimal) improved by 0.12-0.15 decimals in stages 1-2 but only 0.03 decimal in stage 3 (all p < 0.0001) and 0.01 in stage 4 (p = 0.38). Even in eyes with low baseline VA ≤ 0.3, improvements were significant only in stages 1 and 2 (0.12 and 0.17 decimals, respectively). Central subfield thickness (CST) improvement was greatest in stage 3 (-229µm, 37.6%, p < 0.0001), but uncorrelated with VA gains, unlike stages 1 and 2 (respectively: -142µm, 27.4%; - 5µm, 12%; both p < 0.0001). Stage 4 showed no significant CST change. Baseline disorganization of retinal inner layers and focal damage of the ellipsoid zone/external limiting membrane did not influence VA improvement in stages 1 and 2. Treatment patterns varied, with 61% receiving anti-VEGF and 39% dexamethasone, influenced by DME stage, with no significant differences between therapeutic agents. The ESASO classification, which views the retina as a neurovascular unit and integrates multiple biomarkers, surpasses single biomarkers in predicting visual outcomes. Significant functional improvement occurred only in stages 1 and 2, suggesting reversible damage, whereas stages 3 and 4 likely reflect irreversible damage.

Management of treatment-naïve diabetic macular edema patients: Review of real-world clinical data.

The high prevalence of Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a real global health problem. Its complex pathophysiology involves different pathways. Over the last decade, the introduction of intravitreal treatments has dramatically changed the management and prognosis of DME. Among the different treatment options, inhibitors of vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) and intravitreal steroids implants represent the first-line therapy of DME. We conducted a review of electronic databases to compile the available evidence about the clinical management of DME in a clinical setting, with a special focus on treatment-naïve patients. Anti-VEGF therapies represent a valuable option for treating DME patients. However, many patients do not respond properly to this treatment and, due to its administration regimen, many patients receive suboptimal treatment in real life. Current evidence demonstrated that in patients with DME, DEX-i improved significantly both anatomic and visual outcomes. Besides eyes with insufficient anti-VEGF respond or recalcitrant DME cases, DEX-i can be effectively and safely used in treatment-naïve DME patients as first line therapy. DEX-i may be considered first line therapy in different clinical scenarios, such as DME eyes with a greater inflammatory component, patients with cardiovascular events, vitrectomized eyes, or those requiring cataract surgery. In conclusion, there are still many points for improvement pending in the clinical management of the patient with DME. Since DME treatment must follow a patient-tailored approach, selecting the best therapeutic approach for each patient requires a good understanding of the pathophysiology of DME.

The Treatment of Diabetic Retinal Edema with Intravitreal Steroids: How and When.

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a common complication of diabetes mellitus and a leading cause of visual impairment worldwide. It is defined as the diabetes-related accumulation of fluid, proteins, and lipids, with retinal thickening, within the macular area. DME affects a significant proportion of individuals with diabetes, with the prevalence increasing with disease duration and severity. It is estimated that approximately 25-30% of diabetic patients will develop DME during their lifetime. Poor glycemic control, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes duration, and genetic predisposition are recognized as risk factors for the development and progression of DME. Although the exact pathophysiology is still not completely understood, it has been demonstrated that chronic hyperglycemia triggers a cascade of biochemical processes, including increased oxidative stress, inflammation, activation of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), cellular dysfunction, and apoptosis, with breakdown of the blood-retinal barriers and fluid accumulation within the macular area. Early diagnosis and appropriate management of DME are crucial for improving visual outcomes. Although the control of systemic risk factors still remains the most important strategy in DME treatment, intravitreal pharmacotherapy with anti-VEGF molecules or steroids is currently considered the first-line approach in DME patients, whereas macular laser photocoagulation and pars plana vitrectomy may be useful in selected cases. Available intravitreal steroids, including triamcinolone acetonide injections and dexamethasone and fluocinolone acetonide implants, exert their therapeutic effect by reducing inflammation, inhibiting VEGF expression, stabilizing the blood-retinal barrier and thus reducing vascular permeability. They have been demonstrated to be effective in reducing macular edema and improving visual outcomes in DME patients but are associated with a high risk of intraocular pressure elevation and cataract development, so their use requires an accurate patient selection. This manuscript aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the pathology, epidemiology, risk factors, physiopathology, clinical features, treatment mechanisms of actions, treatment options, prognosis, and ongoing clinical studies related to the treatment of DME, with particular consideration of intravitreal steroids therapy.

Current Trends in Diagnosis and Treatment Approach of Diabetic Retinopathy during Pregnancy: A Narrative Review.

Diabetes mellitus during pregnancy and gestational diabetes are major concerns worldwide. These conditions may lead to the development of severe diabetic retinopathy during pregnancy or worsen pre-existing cases. Gestational diabetes also increases the risk of diabetes for both the mother and the fetus in the future. Understanding the prevalence, evaluating risk factors contributing to pathogenesis, and identifying treatment challenges related to diabetic retinopathy in expectant mothers are all of utmost importance. Pregnancy-related physiological changes, including those in metabolism, blood flow, immunity, and hormones, can contribute to the development or worsening of diabetic retinopathy. If left untreated, this condition may eventually result in irreversible vision loss. Treatment options such as laser therapy, intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor drugs, and intravitreal steroids pose challenges in managing these patients without endangering the developing baby and mother. This narrative review describes the management of diabetic retinopathy during pregnancy, highlights its risk factors, pathophysiology, and diagnostic methods, and offers recommendations based on findings from previous literature.

Long-term follow-up of a healthy man with endogenous Streptococcus anginosus endophthalmitis

We report the long-term follow-up of an immunocompetent patient who presented with slowly progressive endogenous endophthalmitis secondary to Streptococcus anginosus. A 46-year-old healthy man presented with a two-month history of right eye iritis. On examination, visual acuity was 20/60 with intraocular pressure of 6 mm Hg. There was a small layer of hypopyon with non-granulomatous anterior uveitis and vitritis. On funduscopy, fluffy white peripheral retinal and pre-retinal lesions were noted in superonasal periphery. The patient denied any present or past illness. Diagnostic pars plana vitrectomy was performed. Culture and polymerase chain reaction of the vitreous sample were positive for Streptococcus anginosus. Intravitreal vancomycin and ceftazidime and systemic ceftriaxone were administered. Work-up which included blood and urine cultures, chest x-ray, echocardiography and abdominal ultrasound was unyielding. Subsequently and because of persistent post-infectious inflammatory reaction, intravitreal and oral steroids were administered in addition to oral azathioprine later on. After one year of follow-up, visual acuity was 20/20 with near vision of Jaeger 3 + and no signs of active uveitis were seen. Therefore, Streptococcus anginosus should be considered in the differential diagnosis of a slowly progressive endophthalmitis also in immunocompetent individuals.

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.

Visual and anatomical outcomes following intravitreal treatment of macular oedema secondary to retinal vein occlusion

Aims/Purpose: We sought to measure the visual and anatomical outcomes of patients treated for macular oedema secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO) with anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) medications or intravitreal steroids.Methods: We retrospectively identified eyes with RVO in our Trust treated with anti‐VEGF injections or intravitreal steroids. Patient data such as age, gender and visual acuity (VA) were obtained from electronic patient records. Central retinal thickness (CRT) was measured via optical coherence tomography (OCT). Macular perfusion and ischaemia were assessed by fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA) on initiation of treatment. VA and CRT data were obtained for 24 months from starting treatment with anti‐VEGF injections or intravitreal steroids.Results: 56 eyes (26 with branch RVO (BRVO), 22 with central RVO (CRVO) and 8 with hemi‐RVO (HRVO)) were identified and followed up for 24 months after starting anti‐VEGF treatment or intravitreal steroids. Mean change in VA at 24 months was +7.0 ± 16.3 letters among CRVO eyes and + 3.9 ± 21.3 letters among BRVO eyes, whereas for HRVO mean VA change was +20.3 ± 16.8 letters. Mean CRT decreased by 334.2 ± 163.5 μm in eyes with CRVO, 147.1 ± 193.1 μm in eyes with BRVO and 300.3 ± 118.6 μm in eyes with HRVO. Furthermore, we achieved VA stabilization or improvement in 91% of eyes treated under ‘optimal’ conditions, in line with the meta‐analysis of studies on RVO outcomes by Hunter &amp; Williams (2022).Conclusions: Current Trust protocols for intravitreal steroids and anti‐VEGF injections show good outcomes in RVO patients. Patients on treatment should be followed up regularly to minimize delays, while early treatment agent switches should be pursued if VA is dropping or macular oedema persists.ReferencesHunter A, Williams M. Long‐term outcomes for patients treated for macular oedema secondary to retinal vein occlusion: a systematic review. BMJ Open Ophthalmol. 2022;7(1):e001010. doi:10.1136/bmjophth‐2022‐001010

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.