Management Of Diabetic Macular Edema Research Articles

Intravitreal OZURDEX vs. Intravitreal Bevacizumab for Diabetic Macular Edema: A Comprehensive Review.

This comprehensive review examines the efficacy, safety, and implications of intravitreal OZURDEX and intravitreal bevacizumab in treating diabetic macular edema (DME). DME is a common complication of diabetes mellitus and a leading cause of vision loss. OZURDEX, through sustained release of dexamethasone, targets inflammation and vascular permeability, while bevacizumab inhibits vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), reducing angiogenesis. However, differences in safety profiles exist, with OZURDEX associated with an increased risk of intraocular pressure elevation and cataract formation and bevacizumab potentially carrying systemic risks. The choice between these treatments should be individualized, considering patient preferences, ocular and systemic comorbidities, and cost-effectiveness. Collaboration among healthcare providers is essential for the comprehensive management of DME. Future research should focus on long-term comparative studies, predictors of treatment response, and exploration of novel therapeutic targets to optimize treatment outcomes for patients with DME.

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.

Efficacy of anti-VEGF monotherapy versus anti-VEGF therapy with subthreshold micropulse laser (SML) in the management of diabetic macular oedema (DMO): a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Intravitreal injection anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (IVI anti-VEGF) therapy serves as the primary treatment for centre involving diabetic macular oedema (DMO). Conventional laser therapy (CLT) adjunct has proven beneficial; however, it is not widely used due to significant risks of retinal scarring. Subthreshold micropulse laser (SML) therapy has, however, emerged as a comparable alternative to combination therapy, offering a distinct advantage by mitigating the risk of retinal scarring. A search of six databases was conducted. A meta-analysis of mean differences was performed including subgroup analyses where appropriate. Primary outcome was the number of injections at 12-14months; secondary outcomes were changes in central macular thickness (CMT) and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 6-8months and 12-14months. A total of ten papers including six randomised clinical trials and four retrospective clinical studies were included in our study, capturing 563 eyes of 478 patients. Overall, the risk of bias was moderate for these studies. Significantly fewer anti-VEGF therapy injections were administered in the combination therapy versus anti-VEGF monotherapy patients at 12-14months who had poor visual acuity (6/18 Snellen or worse) at baseline, mean difference - 2.25 (95% CI; - 3.35, - 1.15; p < 0.05). Combination therapy was not associated with significantly fewer intravitreal injections in patients with a higher visual acuity (6/15 Snellen or better) at baseline. Our analysis also showed significant improvements to both BCVA and CMT were reached at 6 - 8month post-baseline at the 95% confidence intervals: - 1.13 (- 2.09, - 0.16) and - 4.04 (- 7.59, - 0.50). These improvements remained statistically significant at 12-14months: - 0.94 (- 1.67, - 0.20) and - 1.92 (- 3.52, - 0.32) respectively with combination therapy. Our findings demonstrate that combination therapy (SML + IVI anti-VEGF) is associated with fewer intravitreal injections. We report a better BCVA and a reduction in CMT at 6 and 12months from baseline with combination treatment compared to the IVI anti-VEGF monotherapy comparator. SML is a proven non-scarring cost-effective therapy for DMO that should be readily available in the medical retinal therapy as it may reduce the burden of care.

Recommendations for diabetic macular edema management by retina specialists and large language model-based artificial intelligence platforms

PurposeTo study the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in developing diabetic macular edema (DME) management recommendations by creating and comparing responses to clinicians in hypothetical AI-generated case scenarios. The study also examined whether its joint recommendations followed national DME management guidelines.MethodsThe AI hypothetically generated 50 ocular case scenarios from 25 patients using keywords like age, gender, type, duration and control of diabetes, visual acuity, lens status, retinopathy stage, coexisting ocular and systemic co-morbidities, and DME-related retinal imaging findings. For DME and ocular co-morbidity management, we calculated inter-rater agreements (kappa analysis) separately for clinician responses, AI-platforms, and the “majority clinician response” (the maximum number of identical clinician responses) and “majority AI-platform” (the maximum number of identical AI responses). Treatment recommendations for various situations were compared to the Indian national guidelines.ResultsFor DME management, clinicians (ĸ=0.6), AI platforms (ĸ=0.58), and the ‘majority clinician response’ and ‘majority AI response’ (ĸ=0.69) had moderate to substantial inter-rate agreement. The study showed fair to substantial agreement for ocular co-morbidity management between clinicians (ĸ=0.8), AI platforms (ĸ=0.36), and the ‘majority clinician response’ and ‘majority AI response’ (ĸ=0.49). Many of the current study’s recommendations and national clinical guidelines agreed and disagreed. When treating center-involving DME with very good visual acuity, lattice degeneration, renal disease, anaemia, and a recent history of cardiovascular disease, there were clear disagreements.ConclusionFor the first time, this study recommends DME management using large language model-based generative AI. The study’s findings could guide in revising the global DME management guidelines.

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.

Innovations in Diabetic Macular Edema Management: A Comprehensive Review of Automated Quantification and Anti-vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Intervention.

Diabetic macular edema (DME) poses a significant threat to the vision and quality of life of individuals with diabetes. This comprehensive review explores recent advancements in DME management, focusing on integrating automated quantification techniques and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) interventions. The review begins with an overview of DME, emphasizing its prevalence, impact on diabetic patients, and current challenges in management. It then delves into the potential of automated quantification, leveraging machine learning and artificial intelligence to improve early detection and monitoring. Concurrently, the role of anti-VEGF therapies in addressing the underlying vascular abnormalities in DME is scrutinized. The review synthesizes vital findings, highlighting the implications for the future of DME management. Promising outcomes from recent clinical trials and case studies are discussed, providing insights into the evolving landscape of personalized medicine approaches. The conclusion underscores the transformative potential of these innovations, calling for continued research, collaboration, and integration of these advancements into clinical practice. This review aims to serve as a roadmap for researchers, clinicians, and industry stakeholders, fostering a collective effort to enhance the precision and efficacy of DME management.

Diabetic Macular Edema Management: A Review of Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) Therapies.

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a major cause of vision impairment in diabetic individuals, characterized by fluid accumulation in the macula due to a breakdown of the blood-retinal barrier (BRB). This review article explores the role of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapies in the management of DME. Anti-VEGF treatments, including ranibizumab, bevacizumab, and aflibercept, have revolutionized DME management by targeting VEGF, a key mediator in DME pathogenesis. We critically examined the efficacy of these therapies in reducing macular edema and improving visual acuity, assessed their safety and tolerability, and explored the variability in treatment response. The review highlights the latest advancements and future directions in anti-VEGF therapy, including novel drug delivery systems and emerging treatment paradigms. By providing a comprehensive overview of current anti-VEGF therapies, this review seeks to inform clinical practice, guide future research, and contribute to improved patient outcomes in DME management.

Optical Coherence Tomography-Based Grading of Diabetic Macular Edema Is Associated with Systemic Inflammatory Indices and Imaging Biomarkers

Introduction: Objectives of the study were to investigate the correlation between optical coherence tomography (OCT)-based grading of diabetic macular edema (DME) and systemic inflammatory indices, imaging biomarkers, and early anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment response. Methods: A total of 111 eyes from 111 patients with DME treated with intravitreous anti-VEGF therapy for 3 consecutive months every month were enrolled in this retrospective study. According to a protocol termed “TCED,” DME was divided into early, advanced, severe, and atrophic stages. The best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), subretinal fluid (SRF), and the number of hyperreflective foci (HRF) in the whole retinal layers were analyzed at baseline and 3 months after the first injection. Peripheral blood inflammatory indices were calculated, including neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), platelet (PLT)-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), systemic immune-inflammation index (SII), and C-reactive protein (CRP). Statistical analysis was performed to compare the visual and anatomical results and evaluate HRF and SRF in different stages of DME before and after treatment. Results: There were significant differences in systemic inflammatory indices among the four groups, including NLR, PLR, MLR, SII, and CRP (all p < 0.05). The CRP, NLR, PLR, MLR, and SII were significantly higher in the atrophic stage compared to the advanced stage (all p < 0.05). Conversely, the CRP, NLR, PLR, MLR, and SII were significantly lower in the advanced stage compared to the early stage (all p < 0.05). Except for the atrophic stage, BCVA and central retinal thickness (CRT) were significantly improved after treatment in early, advanced and severe stages (all p < 0.05), especially in the severe stage. The decline in the proportion of SRF and HRF ≥20 was the most significant in the advanced stage after anti-VEGF treatment (p < 0.001, p = 0.016), but not in the early and severe stages (all p > 0.05). Conclusion: Systemic inflammatory indices and the decline in the proportion of SRF and HRF ≥20 were closely associated with different stages of DME based on “TCED.” Meanwhile, the “TCED” grading system can predict visual and anatomical prognosis of DME after anti-VEGF treatment, which may be a biomarker for identifying risk stratification and management of DME.

Serum microRNAs as biomarkers associated with the course of diabetic macular oedema

Aims/Purpose: Intravitreal drugs are powerful therapies for diabetic macular edema (DME), but the clinical course and the response to treatments still remains unpredictable. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) represent a class of small molecules associated with the regulation of several metabolic pathways, including diabetes. However, their use in the clinical setting of DME is limited by lack of data regarding the correlation with clinical and imaging features. In the present study we evaluated some miRNAs profiles obtained by serum samples of newly diagnosed DME patients.Methods: Prospective study, including baseline visit (V0), a 4‐months visit (V1) and a 12‐months visit (V2). At V0 patient underwent serum sampling, imaging was repeated at every study visit. Enriched serum microRNAs were extracted and real‐time PCR was performed. OCT features were used to assess the severity and progression of the disease.Results: We collected data of a cohort of type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients. All the patients presented DME and were naïve to intravitreal treatments. The follow‐up was of 12 months. Diabetes‐related miRNAs were found up‐ or downregulated and associated with the course of DME (resolved/recurrent/persistent). Correlations were found with imaging biomarkers.Conclusions: On the basis of these findings, serum miRNAs assessment is a feasible and clinically relevant assessment to be performed in the diagnostic work‐up of diabetic patients affected by DME. MiRNAs might pave the basis for customized treatment strategies to optimize the management of DME.

Effects of repeated intravitreal bevacizumab administration on anterior segment parameters and limbal stem cells

Background: Macular edema (ME) is fluid accumulation in the macula caused by vascular leakage. Repeated intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injections are extensively used to treat ME of different origins, are well tolerated, and have few side effects. This study evaluated the effects of repeated IVB injections on the anterior segment parameters and limbal stem cells (LSCs) in eyes with ME.&#x0D; Methods: This before–after study involved patients with ME of different causes who underwent repeated IVB injections at the Imam Khomeini Ophthalmology Center in Kermanshah, Iran. Before and after repeated IVB injections, anterior segment parameters were measured using anterior segment optical coherence tomography, and the LSCs were assessed using impression cytology.&#x0D; Results: We enrolled 42 eyes of 42 patients with a mean (standard deviation [SD]) age of 59.6 (7.6) years, of whom 25 (59.5%) were men and 17 (40.5%) were women. The underlying diseases included diabetic ME in 30 eyes (71.4%), central (5 [11.9%]) or branch (3 [7.1%]) retinal vein occlusion, and choroidal neovascularization in 4 eyes (9.5%). The right eye was affected in 22 (52.4%) participants. The mean (SD) number of IVB injections was 4.3 (1.3). After repeated injections, the mean central corneal thickness (CCT) increased, whereas the mean anterior chamber angle (ACA) and anterior chamber depth (ACD) decreased (all P&lt;0.001). Three patients developed LSC deficiency after repeated IVB injections for diabetic ME.&#x0D; Conclusions: We observed a significant increase in the mean CCT and a decrease in the mean ACA and ACD after repeated IVB injections in our series. Three patients developed LSC deficiency after repeated IVB injections for diabetic ME management. The observed effect on LSC may cast doubt on the safety of repeated IVB injections; however, this finding must be verified in multicenter clinical trials with longer follow-up periods and larger study samples.

RWC Update: Macular Indentation to Manage Complications of Pathological Myopia; OCT Biomarker Based Decision Making in the Management of Diabetic Macular Edema; Scleritis With Chorioretinal Folds.

RWC Update: Macular Indentation to Manage Complications of Pathological Myopia; OCT Biomarker Based Decision Making in the Management of Diabetic Macular Edema; Scleritis With Chorioretinal Folds.

From randomised controlled trials to real-world data: Clinical evidence to guide management of diabetic macular oedema.

Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) are generally considered the gold-standard for providing scientific evidence for treatments' effectiveness and safety but their findings may not always be generalisable to the broader population treated in routine clinical practice. RCTs include highly selected patient populations that fit specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Although they may have a lower level of certainty than RCTs on the evidence hierarchy, real-world data (RWD), such as observational studies, registries and databases, provide real-world evidence (RWE) that can complement RCTs. For example, RWE may help satisfy requirements for a new indication of an already approved drug and help us better understand long-term treatment effectiveness, safety and patterns of use in clinical practice. Many countries have set up registries, observational studies and databases containing information on patients with retinal diseases, such as diabetic macular oedema (DMO). These DMO RWD have produced significant clinical evidence in the past decade that has changed the management of DMO. RWD and medico-administrative databases are a useful resource to identify low frequency safety signals. They often have long-term follow-up with a large number of patients and minimal exclusion criteria. We will discuss improvements in healthcare information exchange technologies, such as blockchain technology and FHIR (Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources), which will connect and extend databases already available. These registries can be linked with existing or emerging retinal imaging modalities using artificial intelligence to aid diagnosis, treatment decisions and provide prognostic information. The results of RCTs and RWE are combined to provide evidence-based guidelines.

Management of diabetic macular oedema in France from 2012 to 2018: The nationwide LANDSCAPE study.

To describe the management of diabetic macular oedema (DME) patients from the entire French population between 2012 and 2018. In this retrospective longitudinal study, we identified adults treated for DME from the French population using the exhaustive French National Health Information database (SNDS), and an algorithm based on diagnosis and procedure codes, and reimbursed treatments. Between 2012 and 2018, we identified 53 584 treated DME patients, who were followed for up to 7 years from DME treatment initiation. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) became the predominant imaging tool to diagnose DME. Only 14% of patients consulted a diabetologist or endocrinologist in the 3 months prior to initiating DME treatment, whereas 84% consulted a general practitioner. The percentage of patients consulting an ophthalmologist declined over time, from 97% of patients in Year 1 (median of 9 consultations), to 46% in Year 7 (median of 7 consultations). The median DME treatment duration with an anti-VEGF and/or dexamethasone implant treatment was 9 months; 54% of patients had a treatment duration less than 1 year. First-line treatment was more common with ranibizumab (55% of patients) than with aflibercept (30%), or dexamethasone implant (15%). About 25% of patients who initiated anti-VEGF treatment switched treatment at least once, while 30% of patients who initiated dexamethasone implant switched to anti-VEGF treatment at least once. French DME patients seem well-monitored by their ophthalmologist, but median DME treatment duration was just 9 months. These results emphasise the challenge to manage and treat patients with DME over the long term.

Comparison of micropulse subthreshold laser plus anti-VEGF versus anti-VEGF alone in diabetic macular edema: Systematic review.

Intravitreal injection of anti- Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF)is commonly used to treat patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). However, the injection alone requires high cost and compliance. Combining micropulse subthreshold laser (MPSL) and anti-VEGF is a new approach to treating DME. This study intended to answer the question of whether MPSL plus anti-VEGF is effective compared to anti-VEGF alone. The following terms were used in PubMed, clinicaltrial.gov, and Google Scholar: anti-VEGF, DME, MPSL, and diabetic retinopathy. All studies of DME comparing the intervention of MPSL plus anti-VEGF and VEGF alone between the years 2017-2021 were included. Studies with no comparison between the intervention and control group, abstract-only papers, case reports, case series, and systematic review studies were excluded. Five Randomized Controlled Trial (RCTs) and three retrospective studies were analyzed. Four studies found that best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improved in both therapies. Central macular thickness in six studies was also improved. The improvement differences between both therapies were insignificant and the number of anti-VEGF injections was significantly lower in combination therapy. These studies show equal outcomes of both therapies. The reduced number of anti-VEGF injections of the combination therapy could improve the management of DME in terms of cost-effectiveness. Further analysis should be conducted to pool the data from the studies and evaluate the overall outcome.

Exploring the role of retinal fluid as a biomarker for the management of diabetic macular oedema.

Anti-VEGF therapies are associated with significant gains in visual acuity and fluid resolution in the treatment of diabetic macular oedema (DMO) and have become the standard of care. However, despite their efficacy, outcomes can be unpredictable, vary widely between individual eyes, and a large proportion of patients have persistent fluid following initial treatment, with a negative impact on visual outcomes. Anatomical parameters measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT), in addition to visual acuity, are key to monitoring treatment effectiveness and guiding retreatment decisions; however, existing guidelines on the management of DMO lack clear recommendations for interpretation of OCT parameters, or proposed thresholds of various markers to guide retreatment decisions. Although central subfield thickness (CSFT) has been widely used as a marker for retreatment decisions in clinical trials in DMO, and a reduction in CSFT has generally been shown to accompany improvements in best-corrected visual acuity with treatment, analyses of the relationship between these parameters show that the correlation is small to moderate. A more direct relationship can be seen between an increased magnitude of CSFT fluctuations over time and poorer visual acuity, suggesting that control of CSFT could be important in maximising visual outcomes. The relationship between visual outcomes and qualitatively assessed intraretinal fluid and subretinal fluid is also unclear, although quantitative assessments of fluid parameters suggest that untreated intraretinal fluid and subretinal fluid negatively impact visual outcomes. These findings highlight a need for clearer guidelines on the management of retinal fluid to improve visual outcomes for patients with DMO.

The Role of Laser Photocoagulation in Treating Diabetic Macular Edema in the Era of Intravitreal Drug Administration: A Descriptive Review.

Background and Objectives: This study aimed to elucidate the role of laser photocoagulation therapy in the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) as an alternative to, or in conjunction with, the first-line treatment, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). Materials and Methods: A comprehensive literature search to identify studies that evaluated the efficacy of laser photocoagulation therapy in the management of DME was performed. The relevant findings of the efficacy of focal/grid laser therapy from data in randomized, controlled trials were synthesized, and the potential of new laser technologies, such as navigated laser systems, pattern scan lasers, and subthreshold lasers, was explored. The usefulness of multimodal imaging-guided laser therapy was also evaluated, with a focus on the potential contribution to anti-VEGF therapy. Results: Focal laser photocoagulation targeting microaneurysms remains an effective therapeutic approach to chronic refractory edema, despite the widespread use of anti-VEGF therapy. To achieve the best possible treatment outcomes, precise identification of microaneurysms is essential. This requires the use of multimodal imaging-guided, highly accurate, minimally invasive coagulation techniques. Subthreshold laser therapy can also reduce the frequency of anti-VEGF injections and minimize treatment burden. Conclusions: Further studies are needed to determine the optimal timing and settings for laser photocoagulation therapy and the potential of new laser technologies in the management of DME. Nevertheless, laser photocoagulation therapy plays an important role in the management of DME, in conjunction with anti-VEGF therapy.

Pre-operative versus post-operative intravitreal aflibercept injection for management of DME in patients undergoing cataract surgery.

The aim of this paper is to investigate the need of deferring cataract surgery until treating the co-existing diabetic macular edema (DME) using intravitreal (IVI) anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF). A prospective randomized interventional study included diabetic patients with visually significant cataract and DME. Patients were divided into 2 groups. Group A received three preoperative intravitreal (IVI) aflibercept injections with a monthly interval; the third injection was given intra-operatively. Group B received a single intra-operative injection, and two post-operative injections with a monthly interval. The primary outcome measure was the change in central macular thickness (CMT) at 1st and 6th month post-operative. The secondary outcome measures were best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at same points and any documented adverse effects. Forty patients were enrolled in the study, 20 patients in each group. Means of CMT at 1month post-operatively were significantly higher in group B than group A but no statistical difference at 6months. There was no statistical difference between the 2 groups regarding BCVA at 1 or 6months post-operatively. Compared with the baseline values, BCVA and CMT improved significantly after 1 and 6months within both groups. IVI of aflibercept given before cataract surgeries does not seem to have superior effect over postoperative injections in either macular thickness or visual outcomes. Hence, preoperative controlling of DME might not be mandatory in patients undergoing cataract surgery. The study is registered in clinical trial. Gov (NCT05731089).

Guidelines from an expert panel for the management of diabetic macular edema in the Malaysian population.

To derive a Malaysia guideline and consensus as part of the Malaysia Retina Group's efforts for diagnosis, treatment, and best practices of diabetic macular edema (DME). The experts' panel suggests that the treatment algorithm to be divided into groups according to involvement the central macula. The purpose of DME therapy is to improve edema and achieve the best visual results with the least amount of treatment load. On two different occasions, a panel of 14 retinal specialists from Malaysia, together with an external expert, responded to a questionnaire on management of DME. A consensus was sought by voting after compiling, analyzing and discussion on first-phase replies on the round table discussion. A recommendation was deemed to have attained consensus when 12 out of the 14 panellists (85%) agreed with it. The terms target response, adequate response, nonresponse, and inadequate response were developed when the DME patients' treatment responses were first characterized. The panelists reached agreement on a number of DME treatment-related issues, including the need to classify patients prior to treatment, first-line treatment options, the right time to switch between treatment modalities, and side effects associated with steroids. From this agreement, recommendations were derived and a treatment algorithm was created. A detail and comprehensive treatment algorithm by Malaysia Retina Group for the Malaysian population provides guidance for treatment allocation of patients with DME.

Aflibercept for long-term treatment of diabetic macular edema and proliferative diabetic retinopathy: a meta-analysis.

This meta-analysis compared the long-term (12 months or 24 months) efficacy and safety of intravitreal aflibercept injection (IAI) for diabetic macular edema (DME) and proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR). We selected 16 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) performed after 2015 that had a minimum of 12 months and up to 24 months of treatment and conducted a meta-analysis with Review Manager version 5.3. Visual acuity (VA), central subfield thickness (CST) and adverse events were the outcomes selected for evaluation from the eligible studies. Based on 16 RCTs, we evaluated a total of 7125 patients. For PDR and severe DME with poor baseline vision, after a minimum of 12 months and up to 24 months of treatment, the aflibercept treatment group obtained better VA improvement than the focal/grid laser photocoagulation treatment group (MD=13.30; 95%CI: 13.01~13.58; P<0.001) or other treatments (ranibizumab, focal/grid laser photocoagulation, PRP, etal.) group (MD=1.10; 95%CI: 1.05~1.16; P<0.001). In addition, the aflibercept treatment group got higher CST reduction than the focal/grid laser photocoagulation treatment (MD=-33.76; 95%CI: -45.53 ~ -21.99; P<0.001) or other treatments (ranibizumab, focal/grid laser photocoagulation, etal.) group (MD=-33.76; 95%CI: -45.53 ~ -21.99; P<0.001). There was no significant difference in the overall incidence of ocular and non-ocular adverse eventsin eachtreatmentgroup. This meta-analysis showed that the advantages of IAI are obvious in the management of DME and PDR with poor baseline vision for long-term observation (a minimum of 12 months and up to 24 months) with both VA improvement and CST reduction. Applied IAI separately trended to be more effective than panretinal photocoagulation separately in VA improvement for PDR. More parameters should be required to assess functional and anatomic outcomes.

Surgical Management of Diabetic Macular Edema

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is the accumulation of fluid in the extracellular space within the macula and is a major cause of visual impairment among patients with diabetes. First-line treatment for DME includes pharmacotherapy with intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor medications and intravitreal corticosteroids. Alternative therapeutic strategies include laser photocoagulation for non-center involving DME, and surgical options such as pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with or without internal limiting membrane (ILM) peel in cases with vitreoretinal interface anomalies or DME refractory to pharmacotherapy, and the Port Delivery System (PDS) for sustained release of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) medication. Our aim is to review the existing literature on surgical management of DME including imaging changes in chronic DME and the clinical relevance of surgical intervention. Imaging changes associated with DME and a worse prognosis include disorganization of the retinal layer, disruption of both the external limiting membrane (ELM) and ellipsoid zone, and vitreomacular interface abnormalities. Studies involving pars plana vitrectomy with and without ILM peel show anatomic improvement but may not always be associated with significant change in visual outcomes. Early studies lacked detailed imaging of the retinal layers and PPV was likely performed as a last resort. In addition, the novel PDS is surgically implanted into the pars plana and works as a drug reservoir with controlled release of drug. However, it has been recalled in patients with wet age-related macular degeneration due to issues with dislodgement. Surgical interventions for DME include pars plana vitrectomy with and without ILM peel and new surgical therapies for DME such as the PDS and subretinal gene therapy have the potential to reduce the risk of DME progression.