Macular Laser Photocoagulation Research Articles

Application of optical coherence tomography angiography in the assessment of diabetic macular edema staging and laser photocoagulation efficacy

ObjectiveThis study aimed to analyze the effect of optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) on diabetic macular edema (DME) staging and assess the efficacy of laser photocoagulation. MethodsEighty-six patients (141 eyes) with suspected DME who visited our hospital from August 2019 to March 2022 were selected and underwent fundus angiography and OCTA. The two examination methods were compared in terms of their efficacy in macular edema staging. Subsequently, the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of OCTA in diagnosing DME were assessed using fundus angiography as the gold standard. In patients with clinically significant macular edema (CSME) treated with laser photocoagulation, the central concave non-perfused zone (FAZ), vascular density (VD), central macular retinal thickness (CRT), whole retinal blood flow density (FD-300), superficial capillary plexus (SCP), and deep capillary plexus (DCP) were measured using the OCTA 3 mm × 3 mm mode before treatment, at 3 months after treatment, and at 6 months after treatment. SCP, deep capillary plexus (DCP), blood flow density (VD), best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and central retinal thickness (CRT) were recorded before treatment, 3 months after treatment, and 6 months after treatment. The correlation between BCVA and pre-treatment OCTA parameters at 6 months after treatment was analyzed using Pearson's correlation. ResultsFundus angiography was performed in 86 patients (141 eyes) with suspected DME. Of the 141 eyes, 44 had no leakage, 52 had diffuse edema, 40 had focal macular edema, and 5 had eyes ischemia. A total of 97 eyes showed CSME on fundus angiography. Using fundus angiography as the gold standard, OCTA exhibited a sensitivity of 97.94 %, a specificity of 63.64 %, and an accuracy of 87.23 % in diagnosing CSME. The Kappa value between OCTA and fundus angiography was 0.674. The receiver operating characteristic curve revealed that the area under the curve (AUC) of OCTA in diagnosing CSME was 0.808 (95 % confidence interval: 0.717–0.899). The BCVA was higher, while the CRT was lower in CSME patients at 3 and 6 months after treatment (P<0.05). No significant difference was observed in the OCTA parameters in CSME patients at 3 months after treatment compared with that before treatment (P>0.05). Similarly, no significant difference was found in the FD300 of CSME patients at 6 months after treatment compared with that before treatment (P>0.05). However, the FAZ area, DCP-VD (overall, central concave, and paracentral concave), and SCP-VD (overall, central concave, and paracentral concave) were higher in CSME patients at 6 months after treatment compared with that before treatment (P<0.05). Pearson's correlation showed that BCVA was positively correlated with pre-treatment FAZ area, DCP-VD, and SCP-VD (r>0, P<0.05), and negatively associated with CRT (r<0, P<0.05). ConclusionOCTA exhibited high sensitivity and specificity in diagnosis and staging DME. It adeptly captures the microvascular and visual changes in the central macular recess before and after laser photocoagulation therapy, which can quantitatively guide the follow-up treatment 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.

Intravitreal injection of methotrexate in persistent diabetic macular edema: a 6-month study.

Diabetic macular edema (DME) affects approximately 10% of patients with diabetes mellitus. This condition can cause blurred or distorted vision, which significantly affects the quality of life of these patients. We evaluated the therapeutic effects of intravitreal methotrexate (MTX) injections on persistent DME. This prospective interventional case series included patients with confirmed persistent DME that was unresponsive to previous standard treatments. The patients underwent comprehensive eye examinations and macular imaging with optical coherence tomography (OCT). A single intravitreal MTX injection (400 µg MTX in 0.16 mL solution) was administered, followed by patient assessments at 1, 3, and 6 months after injection. Best-corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), macular thickness (MT), and central subfield thickness (CST) were measured at baseline and post-injection to evaluate treatment efficacy. We included 33 eyes of 30 patients with a mean (standard deviation [SD], range) age of 62.7 (8.3, 44 to 77) years, of whom 17 (56.7%) were men and 13 (43.3%) were women. All participants had type 2 diabetes mellitus, with a mean (SD, range) duration of 17.0 (6.8, 10 to 31) years. Most participants (n = 27 eyes, 81.8%) had non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy, and six eyes (18.2%) had regressed proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Four eyes (12.1%) had undergone prior macular laser photocoagulation. The mean (SD) number of prior intravitreal bevacizumab injections was 3.4 (0.8), and 29 eyes (87.8%) had received one intravitreal triamcinolone injection. During the study period, a statistically significant difference was observed in CST (P < 0.05); however, no statistically significant differences were observed in BCDVA, MT, or IOP (P > 0.05). Pairwise comparison revealed a significant decrease in CST at 6 months post-injection compared to the baseline value (P < 0.05). During the investigation period, no side effects of MTX, such as macular edema, retinal tears, vitreous hemorrhage, endophthalmitis, or vision loss, were observed. A single intravitreal MTX injection significantly reduced CST in patients with persistent DME, without relevant safety concerns. However, no significant improvement in functional outcomes was observed. Therefore, there is no strong evidence to recommend its use as a treatment for pDME. Further studies, preferably randomized clinical trials with long-term follow-ups, are warranted to assess the long-term efficacy, safety, and potential benefits of intravitreal MTX for the treatment of persistent DME.

Long-term Longitudinal Analysis of Subfoveal Choroidal Thickness Following Sulodexide Treatment in Diabetic Retinopathy Patients

Purpose: To evaluate the two-year longitudinal changes in subfoveal choroidal thickness (CT) following sulodexide treatment in patients with diabetic retinopathy.Methods: Thirty-eight eyes from patients with diabetic retinopathy, followed for a minimum of two years after sulodexide administration, were included. Subfoveal CT, measured using optical coherence tomography, was analyzed prospectively. Variables including age, sex, duration of diabetes mellitus, HbA1c, blood pressure, sulodexide treatment duration, refractive error, axial length, central macular thickness (CMT), visual acuity, laser photocoagulation, and intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections were evaluated for potential effects on CT. CMT, subfoveal CT, and choroidal vascularity index were compared at baseline and at 6, 12, and 24 months after sulodexide.Results: Of the 38 eyes, 10 belonged to males and 28 to females. The mean data were as follows: age, 67.18 ± 8.87 years; duration of diabetes, 18.11 ± 7.57 years; HbA1c, 8.76 ± 1.60 mmol/L; systolic blood pressure, 134.69 ± 14.68 mmHg; diastolic blood pressure, 73.72 ± 11.90 mmHg; duration of sulodexide, 25.79 ± 3.17 months; refractive error, 0.22 ± 2.19 diopters (D); and axial length, 23.32 ± 0.89 mm. During the observation period, 15 eyes underwent laser photocoagulation and 17 eyes received intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections. The mean subfoveal CT was 216.00 ± 64.23 μm before sulodexide administration and increased to 223.87 ± 62.18 μm, 225.53 ± 62.02 μm, and 225.76 ± 63.62 μm at 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively (&lt;i&gt;p&lt;/i&gt; = 0.0377, &lt;i&gt;p&lt;/i&gt; = 0.0159, &lt;i&gt;p&lt;/i&gt; = 0.0135). The CMT was 318.14 ± 102.28 μm initially and changed to 313.08 ± 77.47 μm, 314.97 ± 88.32 μm, and 320.03 ± 97.36 μm at the aforementioned intervals, with no significant variation (&lt;i&gt;p&lt;/i&gt; = 0.904, &lt;i&gt;p&lt;/i&gt; = 0.736, &lt;i&gt;p&lt;/i&gt; = 0.892).Conclusions: Sulodexide administration led to a significant rise in subfoveal CT over a 2-year follow-up. This change in CT was not mirrored in the CMT.

Diabetic macular edema

AbstractThe main diabetic macular edema (DME) treatment options include intravitreal injections of anti‐VEGF agents and intravitreal injections of corticosteroids. In the past, macular laser photocoagulation (LP) was a standard of DME treatment, however, now it is utilized as an additional treatment. Two most important techniques of LP in patients with DME include focal photocoagulation and the grid laser. According to European Society of Retina Specialists (EURETINA) guidelines focal or grid laser should be utilized mainly for non‐center involving DME. In recent years anti‐VEGFs were found superior over typical laser treatment in DME patients. However, new tissue‐sparing technique, subthreshold micropulse laser (SML), avoids protein coagulation and prevents retinal scars, allowing retinal anatomic and functional preservation. It helps to improve or stabilize visual function and decrease macular thickness in treatment of DME.Corticosteroids are often used as an alternative therapy for eyes with insufficient response to anti‐VEGF treatment because they act on different targets than anti‐VEGF agents leading to by inflammation reduction, decrease in the disruption of the blood‐retinal barrier, and retinal angiogenesis. The major steroids used in the treatment of DME include triamcinolone acetonide (TA), dexamethasone (DEX) and fluocinolone acetonide (FA). It is known, however, that steroids frequently increase the intraocular pressure, and are related with the risk of cataract development.

Ischemia and laser photocoagulation in retinal vein occlusion

Retinal vein occlusions (RVO) are associated with retinal ischemia to ahighly variable extent. An ischemic retina may lead to the development of neovascularization and further to secondary complications such as neovascular glaucoma, vitreous hemorrhage or tractional retinal detachment. Numerous factors such as vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and other cytokines are produced in the ischemic area, which cause macular edema. Before the introduction of intravitreal drug injections (IVI), retinal laser photocoagulation was the leading form of treatment. Macular laser photocoagulation was applied in the form of focal laser or grid laser in patients with branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) to treat macular edema. In patients with ischemic RVO, panretinal laser photocoagulation (PRP) was recommended for treatment of secondary neovascular complications. The value of laser treatment in the management of patients with RVO changed after the introduction of IVI treatment. This article presents a review of the current study results and the recommendations for performing laser photocoagulation of the central and peripheral retina in patients with RVO. Conventional focal or grid laser photocoagulation has been replaced by IVI treatment in the management of macular edema secondary to BRVO; however, macular laser treatment can still be considered in patients with BRVO if the macular edema persists despite the use of available IVI drugs. The use of central laser photocoagulation in these cases is based on the findings of fluorescein angiography. Disseminated panretinal laser photocoagulation is still indicated in RVO patients who have large areas of nonperfusion, have developed neovascularization and/or late complications. Targeted laser photocoagulation of the peripheral areas of nonperfusion has recently been recommended by several authors and is expected to improve not only the visual outcome of IVI treatment, but more importantly to also reduce the duration of treatment and the number of re-injections needed. Clear evidence for targeted laser treatment is not yet available and is afocus of currently ongoing prospective randomized studies.

Laser Treatment Modalities for Diabetic Retinopathy

Diabetes is a chronic progressive metabolic disorder that is caused by the body's inability to regulate blood glucose levels. If uncontrolled, it can lead to various complications. Among its various complications, long-term diabetes leads to diabetic retinopathy (DR). It is a disease involving blood vessels and the destruction of retinal nerves. It is usually classified into two types: proliferativediabetic retinopathy (PDR) and nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR). It progresses and causes loss of vision. The leading cause of loss of vision is diabetic macular edema (DME). The argon laser is used as a modality in the management of PDR. There are various types of laser photocoagulation, such as peripheral retinal laser photocoagulation,focal macular laser photocoagulation, and grid photocoagulation. DR results in various adverse consequences such as vitreous hemorrhage, fibrosis, traction, detachment of the retina, and glaucoma. To assess DR, a detailedfundus examination with a slit lamp biomicroscopeneeds to be done. Seven-standard field stereoscopic-color fundus photography needs to be done for documentation and follow-up. Patients with diabetesmellitus (DM) type 1 have a greater risk of suffering fromDR. Another major complication of the condition is DME, which is characterized by an increase in the permeability of vessels and the thickening of the central part of the retina along with the accumulation of hard exudates on the macula. This article discussesvarious laser therapy modalities for the treatment of DR, their types, mechanisms, and aims. Clinical features of DR include abnormal dilatation of capillaries, and outpouchings in the form of microaneurysm from the capillary wallareone of the earliest and most dangerous changes; later, non-perfusion of the retina occurs, which is associated with cotton wool spots and blot hemorrhages. In patients suffering from PDR and maculopathy, peripheral retinal laser photocoagulation is used as a mode of intervention.

Therapeutic Effects of Combination Therapy and Photobiomodulation Therapy on Retinal Regeneration.

Introduction: Many systemic and ocular diseases cause macular edema (ME). Macular edema is seen in two primary forms; the first is diffuse thickening of the macula, and the other is a macula with a distinct petaloid (cloverleaf) appearance called cystoid macular edema. Macular edema has a known role in the reduction of visual equity, and many options have been proposed for the reversal of this condition. Methods: Articles on the effects of macular laser grid photocoagulation on diabetic macular edema (DME) or cystoid macular edema published between 2000 and 2022 were collected from PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science. The following keywords were used for the search: "macular laser photocoagulation", "macular edema", "cystoid macular edema", "intravitreal pharmacotherapies", and "antivascular endothelial growth factor". Two hundred nineteen articles were found in google scholar and 165 articles in PubMed, and a total of 58 articles were included in the study after applying the exclusion criteria. Results: We investigated the effects of various lasers photocoagulation such as Focal and/or grid macular laser, subthreshold micropulse laser (SMPL), as well as intravitreal pharmacotherapies with triamcinolone acetonide, and fluocinolone, and extended released intraocular implants such as Ozurdex, Retisert, Iluvien, and anti-vascular endothelial growth factors such as bevacizumab (Avastin), Eyela, and Lucentis. Corticosteroids were more effective than lasers, although some researchers have found that lasers and combined lasers and corticosteroids are more effective. In addition, some studies have shown that the frequency and concentrations of intravitreal pharmacotherapies are effective in increasing visual outcomes. Conclusion: The results of the studies showed that the combined intravitreal corticosteroids are much more effective in improving visual acuity (VA) than a single corticosteroid, and the low concentration of the drug is safer. Still, corticosteroids have side effects such as increased intraocular pressure and glaucoma. Therefore, combining the medication with a laser is much more reasonable than each alone. Also, the subthreshold photocoagulation laser (670 nm) is better at reducing the central macular thickness (CMT) and improving VA than the micro pulse yellow laser and pan-retinal photocoagulation (PRP).

Fluocinolone acetonide implant in diabetic macular edema: International experts' panel consensus guidelines and treatment algorithm.

Center-involving diabetic macular edema (DME) is a leading cause of vision impairment in working-age adults. While its management is particularly challenging in a poorly compliant population, continuous innovation and the advent of new molecules have improved its outcome. The control of glycemia and of systemic aggravating factors remain essential to slow down progression of disease complications including DME. The indications for macular laser photocoagulation has progressively been phased out as a standard of care and replaced by local intraocular anti-VEGFs biologics and glucocorticoids (GCs). Intravitreal GCs in controlled-release drug delivery systems have allowed to reduce injection frequency and treatment burden. The non biodegradable Fluocinolone Acetonide (FAc) implant allows a long-lasting stabilization of both functional and anatomic improvements. However, adequate patient selection and monitoring through regular follow-up are essential for optimal results. Based on their experience and the latest literature, the aim of the present review is to provide international expert panel consensus on the place of the FAc implant in the treatment algorithm of DME, as well as its safety profile and how to manage it.

Combination intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors and macular laser photocoagulation relative to intravitreal injection monotherapy in macular oedema secondary to retinal vein occlusion: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

This meta-analysis investigates the efficacy and safety of intravitreal anti-VEGF injections (IVI) compared to combination laser photocoagulation and IVI (LPC-IVI) in treating macular oedema secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO). A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL was conducted from inception until March 2021. Randomized controlled trials that reported relevant efficacy and/or safety parameters following LPC-IVI relative to IVI were included. Meta-analysis was conducted with a random effects model. The primary outcome was best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), while secondary outcomes were central macular thickness (CMT), central retinal thickness (CRT), central subfield thickness (CST), number of IVIs received, and incidence of adverse events. A total of 10 studies were included, for which 362 eyes were randomized to LPC-IVI and 365 to IVI. In comparing macular laser photocoagulation with IVI (MLP-IVI) in BRVO patients, no significant differences were seen in final BCVA (p = 0.78) or change in BCVA (p = 0.09) after treatment. Similarly, no significant differences were seen in final CMT (p = 0.54), change in CMT (p = 0.33), final CRT (p = 0.90), change in CRT (p = 0.97), or number of injections required (p = 0.78). The same results were seen in subgroup analyses for macular laser without peripheral laser in BRVO and CRVO patients. Consistent results were observed when considering peripheral LPC-IVI to IVI in BRVO and CRVO. No significant differences were seen between combination MLP-IVI or peripheral LPC-IVI relative to IVI monotherapy for final BCVA or OCT parameters in macular oedema secondary to RVO.

What do Cochrane systematic reviews say about interventions for retinal vein occlusion

Abstract Purpose: To summarize the evidence from Cochrane systematic reviews on interventions for Central or Branch Vein Occlusion. Methods: We included and summarized the results from Cochrane systematic reviews on interventions for both types of occlusion. The initial search retrieved was 21 reviews and four of them were selected. Results: The four systematic reviews included evaluated the effects of laser techniques and intravitreal injections of Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (anti-VEGF) and corticosteroids on Branch and Central Retinal Vein Occlusions. Conclusions: In Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion was found some benefits in the use of grid laser when comparable to no intervention but insufficient evidence about the use of early grid laser, subthreshold laser, intravitreal triamcinolone or anti-VEGF over macular grid laser photocoagulation. In Central Retinal Vein Occlusion with Macular Edema was found insufficient evidence to determine the benefits of intravitreo steroids but ranibizumab may improve clinical and visual outcomes at six and 12 months and repeated intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF agents improved visual outcomes at six months when compared to no treatment.

Retinal Vein Apoplexy: Pathogenesis, Risk Factors Hematological Disorders and Treatment

Retinal vein impediment (RVO) is the most common retinal vascular sickness after diabetic retinopathy. Attributable to its multifactorial nature, notwithstanding, the board of this condition remains a test. Of the two fundamental kinds of RVO, branch retinal vein impediment (BRVO) is more pervasive than central retinal vein impediment (CRVO). Most patients create the disease at an older age, and the greater parts of them have associated foundational messes (for example hypertension, hyperlipidemia and/or diabetes mellitus). There is no proof to suggest routine testing for heritable thrombophilia’s in patients with RVO. The fundamental driver of the visual debilitation is macular edema, while neovascularization of the retina and optic plate are the most genuine inconveniences prompting glassy hemorrhage, retinal separation and neovascular glaucoma. Macular grid laser photocoagulation is an effective treatment for macularedema in patients with BRVO and a visual keenness of 20/40 or less. Other treatment choices for decreasing the edema are intra vitreal steroids, against VEGF medications and vitrectomy. The recently presented intra vitreal use of steroids and against VEGF medications might end up being a superior methodology for improving visual keenness. At long last, dissipate pan retinal laserphotocoagulationcan effectively treat neovascularization and its secondary complications.

Topical Interferon Alpha 2b in the Treatment of Refractory Diabetic Macular Edema

PurposeTo report the efficacy of topical interferon alpha 2b in the treatment of refractory diabetic macular edema.MethodsIn this retrospective interventional case series, five eyes of three individuals with diabetic macular edema resistant to multiple intravitreal injections of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor drugs and macular photocoagulation were included.ResultsAll studied eyes had undergone multiple intravitreal injections including bevacizumab, combination of bevacizumab and triamcinolone and aflibercept, and macular laser photocoagulation before being included in this study. Two intravitreal ranibizumab injections had also been performed in both eyes of one patient. Two eyes had undergone pars plana vitrectomy, one for diabetic macular edema and the other for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. After a discussion regarding the experimental topical interferon alpha 2b treatment, all patients agreed to start interferon alpha 2b drops four times a day. One month after the treatment, optical coherence tomography demonstrated a significant improvement in macular structure and thickness which was stable or improved at the three-month follow-up visit. Visual acuity in all eyes was stable or improved throughout the three-month follow-up period. Conjunctival injection and follicular conjunctivitis were the side effects of topical interferon alpha 2b and were treated with lubrication and steroids.ConclusionThis case series demonstrated the potential efficacy of interferon alpha 2b in the treatment of refractory diabetic macular edema. It might be an option in patients with contraindications for intravitreal injections.

Representativity of macular edema mapping using en face optical coherence tomography, retinal thickness map, and fluorescein angiography

Aim.To study the representativity of macular edema mapping using en face optical coherence tomography (OCT), retinal thickness map, and fluorescein angiography (FA).&#x0D; Methods.In this retrospective cross-sectional study, 8 patients (15 eyes) with diabetic macular edema (2 females and 6 males, mean age 66.58.1 years) were included. All patients OCT (retinal thickness map and en face OCT) and FA were performed. En face slab was constructed between inner plexiform layer and retinal pigment epithelium. Thearea of macular edema was measured by two masked graders independently.&#x0D; Results.There was no statistically significant difference in the area of macular edema between FA, en face OCT, and retinal thickness maps, 12.78.1, 14.58.4, 10.46.9 mm2, respectively (ANOVA3,p=0.34). Intraclass correlation coefficient for three methods was 0.87 and 0.95, for individual and mean values, respectively.&#x0D; Conclusion.En face OCT is an adequate non-invasive alternative for FA in evaluating the area of macular edema and planning of grid macular laser photocoagulation.

Optical coherence tomography angiography assessment of 577 nm laser effect on severe non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy with diabetic macular edema.

To quantitatively evaluate the effect of the combined use of 577-nm subthreshold micropulse macular laser (SML) and multi-point mode pan retinal laser photocoagulation (PRP) on severe non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) with central-involved diabetic macular edema (CIDME) using optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA). In this observational clinical study, 86 eyes of 86 NPDR patients with CIDME who underwent SML and PRP treatment were included. Images were obtained 1d before laser and post-laser (1d, 1wk, 1, 3, and 6mo) using AngioVue software 2.0. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA, LogMAR), foveal avascular zone area (FAZ), choriocapillary flow area (ChF), parafoveal vessel density (PVD), capillary density inside disc (CDD), peripapillary capillary density (PCD), macular ganglion cell complex thickness (mGCCT), central macular thickness (CMT), and subfoveal choroidal thickness (ChT) were compared between pre- and post-laser treatment. BCVA remained stable during 6mo post-laser therapy (pre-laser vs 6mo post-laser: 0.53±0.21 vs 0.5±0.15, P>0.05). PVD, ChF, ChT, CMT, and mGCCT significantly increased 1d post-laser therapy [pre-laser vs 1d post-laser: superficial PVD (%), 40.51±3.42 vs 42.43±4.68; deep PVD (%), 42.66±3.67 vs 44.78±4.52; ChF, 1.72±0.21 vs 1.9±0.12 mm2; ChT, 302.45±69.74 vs 319.38±70.93 µm; CMT, 301.65±110.78 vs 320.86±105.62 µm; mGCCT, 105.71±10.72 vs 115.46±9.64 µm; P<0.05]. However, PVD, ChF and ChT decreased to less than baseline level at 6mo post-laser therapy (pre-laser vs 6mo post-laser: superficial PVD (%), 40.51±3.42 vs 36.32±4.19; deep PVD (%), 42.66±3.67 vs 38.76±3.74; ChF, 1.72±0.21 vs 1.62±0.09 mm2; ChT, 302.45±69.74 vs 289.61±67.55 µm; P<0.05), whereas CMT and mGCCT decreased to baseline level at 6mo post-laser therapy (CMT, 301.65±110.78 vs 297.77±90.23 µm; mGCCT, 105.71±10.72 vs 107.05±11.81 µm; P>0.05). Moreover, FAZ continuously increased while CDD and PCD continuously decreased in 6mo after laser therapy. CMT and ChT had a significant positive correlation with ChF and PVD in most post-laser stages. During a 6-month follow-up period after combined use of SML and PRP therapy, BCVA remained stable and there was a decreased trend in macular edema. Blood flow increased at 1d post-laser therapy and reduced at 6mo post-laser therapy.

Long-term outcomes of treat-and-extend ranibizumab with and without navigated laser for diabetic macular oedema: TREX-DME 3-year results

Background/aimsTo evaluate the long-term effects of treat-and-extend dosing of ranibizumab with and without navigated focal laser for diabetic macular oedema (DME).MethodsThis is a multicentre, randomised clinical trial where 150 eyes...

Impact of Systemic Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitor Use in Diabetic Macular Edema

To evaluate impact of baseline systemic dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor use in diabetic macular edema (DME). This was a post hoc exploratory analysis of previously completed randomized, controlled clinical trials (VISTA and VIVID) in patients with DME evaluating intravitreal aflibercept injection (IAI) every 4 weeks (2q4) or every 8 weeks (2q8) or macular laser photocoagulation. Overall, a small number of patients (12.2% [n = 35], 9.7% [n = 28], and 15.4% [n = 44]) in the laser control, 2q4, and 2q8 groups reported baseline DPP-4 inhibitor use. There were no differences in changes from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity, central subfield thickness, or rates of 2-or-greater-step improvement in Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale score based on DPP-4 inhibitor use within each treatment group. DPP-4 inhibitor use at baseline did not influence the magnitude of visual and anatomic benefit in patients with DME being treated with IAI or laser. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2020;51:226-234.].

&lt;p&gt;Intravitreal Aflibercept versus Laser Photocoagulation in Asian Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema: The VIVID-East Study&lt;/p&gt;

PurposeThe prevalence of diabetes and diabetes-related complications, including diabetic macular edema (DME), is increasing in Asia and worldwide.MethodsVIVID-East was a 12-month, double-masked, randomized, active-controlled, Phase 3 trial (NCT01783886) enrolling adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with DME at 25 centers across China, Hong Kong, Republic of Korea, and Russia. Eyes were randomized 1:1:1 to 2 mg intravitreal aflibercept (IVT-AFL) every 4 weeks (2q4; N=127), 2 mg IVT-AFL every 8 weeks (after 5 initial monthly doses from baseline to week 16) with sham injections on nontreatment visits (2q8; N=127), or macular laser photocoagulation at baseline and sham injections at every visit (laser control group; N=124). The primary efficacy endpoint was mean change in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline to week 52.ResultsCompared with baseline, at week 52 the mean (SE) BCVA in the 2q4 and 2q8 groups gained +13.6 (0.9) and +13.1 (1.0) letters, respectively, versus −0.5 (1.4) letters in the laser group (P<0.0001 for both). A significantly higher proportion of patients treated with IVT-AFL (2q4 and 2q8) achieved a ≥10-letter or ≥15-letter gain compared with laser (both P<0.0001) (≥10-letter gain: 70.9%, 62.7%, and 23.4%, respectively; ≥15-letter gain: 43.3%, 36.5%, and 12.1%, respectively). Mean reduction in central retinal thickness from baseline to week 52 was significantly greater with IVT-AFL versus laser treatment. Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was low and similar across groups; conjunctival hemorrhage (11.8%), retinal hemorrhage (8.7%), retinal aneurysm (7.5%), and retinal exudates (5.5%) being the most frequently reported. Visual and anatomic outcomes in the Chinese subgroup were consistent with the overall population.ConclusionIVT-AFL treatment resulted in significant visual and anatomic improvements in Asian patients with DME. Treatment benefits observed in the overall study population were mirrored in the subgroup of Chinese patients, who made up the largest population group in the study.Study RegistrationNCT01783886.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of intravitreal aflibercept in the treatment of diabetic macular edema in China.

Aim: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of intravitreal aflibercept compared with macular laser photocoagulation and ranibizumab for diabetic macular edema (DME) in China. Methods: A Markov model was developed to reflect the vision changes in DME patients. Parameters were estimated from VIVID-EAST trial data, published literature and physician surveys. Results: In a 20-year horizon, intravitreal aflibercept was associated with 7.825 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and 217,841 Chinese Yuan Renminbi (CNY), laser photocoagulation was associated with 7.189 QALYs and 135,489 CNY, and ranibizumab was associated with 7.462 QALYs and 222,477 CNY. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were 129,397 CNY/QALY and -12,774 CNY/QALY for intravitreal aflibercept versus laser photocoagulation and ranibizumab, respectively. Conclusion: Intravitreal aflibercept was considered as a cost-effective strategy for DME when compared with laser photocoagulation; it was considered as a dominant strategy when compared with ranibizumab.

Macular laser photocoagulation in the management of diabetic macular edema: Still relevant in 2020?

Macular laser photocoagulation (MLP) is inferior to intravitreal vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors in the treatment of center-involved diabetic macular edema (DME). Ultra-widefield fluorescein angiography-guided laser photocoagulation to presumed ischemic areas of the peripheral retina or MLP do not reduce the treatment burden nor improve the visual outcomes of eyes treated with anti-VEGF drugs. Destruction of retinal tissue is not necessary to induce a therapeutic response in DME. Modern lasers are capable of producing invisible laser “burns” that do not destroy the targeted tissue using micropulse subthreshold (ST) mode where the laser's duty cycle is modified or alternatively selective retinal therapy (SRT) where ultrashort pulses of continuous wave laser selectively target the RPE. The best results with micropulse ST laser are obtained in eyes with a central macular thickness ≤400 μm. Eyes need to be treated in a continuous manner with no spaces between burns in the edematous area. Micropulse ST-MLP downregulates inflammatory biomarkers produced by activated microglial cells and Müller cells. Micropulse ST-MLP may reduce the anti-VEGF injection burden in DME. In SRT, the diseased RPE is targeted and heated with the laser with the hope that the adjacent RPE migrates and proliferates into these areas to heal the diseased RPE. There is much less experience with SRT, but the results are promising and deserve further study.