Chiara Giuffrè1, Maria Vittoria Cicinelli2, Alessandro Marchese1, Michele Coppola3, Maurizio Battaglia Parodi1, Francesco Bandello1. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, University Vita-Salute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, University Vita-Salute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy. cicinelli.mariavittoria@hsr.it. 3. Ophthalmology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera di Monza, Via G. B. Pergolesi, 33, 20900, Monza, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the functional and anatomical outcomes of concurrent administration of aflibercept injection and dexamethasone (DEX) implant in patients with macular edema (ME) secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO), refractory to each of the two drugs previously administered as monotherapy. Secondary outcomes included the number of retreatments required in a 12-month follow-up and safety. METHODS: This is a prospective, interventional case series of consecutive patients with refractory ME secondary to RVO, followed over a year. One injection of aflibercept was followed by a DEX implant on the same day; retreatment was driven by the persistence of ME on SD-OCT at least 4 months after the previous combined therapy. Central retinal thickness (CRT), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and intraocular pressure (IOP) were collected at 1 month and then every 2 months until the end of follow-up. RESULTS: Thirty eyes of 30 Caucasian patients were enrolled; mean duration of RVO before the first combined treatment was 25 ± 5 months (range 11 ± 30). Baseline BCVA was 0.73 ± 0.5 LogMAR, with no significant changes at 12 months (0.77 ± 0.51 μm, p = 0.2). Baseline CRT was 578.3 ± 161 μm, reducing to 352.5 ± 81 μm at 12 months (p = 0.003). Thirteen eyes (43.3%) required a second treatment. Twenty eyes (66.6%) showed no ME at the end of follow-up. One patient (3.3%) required topical IOP-lowering therapy during the study. CONCLUSION: In eyes with ME secondary to RVO unresponsive to either aflibercept or DEX administered singularly, a combination therapy with simultaneous administration of aflibercept and DEX was effective in resolving ME, despite the absence of visual improvement. Earlier combined treatment in the course of the disease might lead to better functional outcomes.
PURPOSE: To assess the functional and anatomical outcomes of concurrent administration of aflibercept injection and dexamethasone (DEX) implant in patients with macular edema (ME) secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO), refractory to each of the two drugs previously administered as monotherapy. Secondary outcomes included the number of retreatments required in a 12-month follow-up and safety. METHODS: This is a prospective, interventional case series of consecutive patients with refractory ME secondary to RVO, followed over a year. One injection of aflibercept was followed by a DEX implant on the same day; retreatment was driven by the persistence of ME on SD-OCT at least 4 months after the previous combined therapy. Central retinal thickness (CRT), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and intraocular pressure (IOP) were collected at 1 month and then every 2 months until the end of follow-up. RESULTS: Thirty eyes of 30 Caucasian patients were enrolled; mean duration of RVO before the first combined treatment was 25 ± 5 months (range 11 ± 30). Baseline BCVA was 0.73 ± 0.5 LogMAR, with no significant changes at 12 months (0.77 ± 0.51 μm, p = 0.2). Baseline CRT was 578.3 ± 161 μm, reducing to 352.5 ± 81 μm at 12 months (p = 0.003). Thirteen eyes (43.3%) required a second treatment. Twenty eyes (66.6%) showed no ME at the end of follow-up. One patient (3.3%) required topical IOP-lowering therapy during the study. CONCLUSION: In eyes with ME secondary to RVO unresponsive to either aflibercept or DEX administered singularly, a combination therapy with simultaneous administration of aflibercept and DEX was effective in resolving ME, despite the absence of visual improvement. Earlier combined treatment in the course of the disease might lead to better functional outcomes.
Authors: Frank G Holz; Johann Roider; Yuichiro Ogura; Jean-François Korobelnik; Christian Simader; Georg Groetzbach; Robert Vitti; Alyson J Berliner; Florian Hiemeyer; Karola Beckmann; Oliver Zeitz; Rupert Sandbrink Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2013-01-07 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Ramin Tadayoni; Sebastian M Waldstein; Francesco Boscia; Heinrich Gerding; Margarita Gekkieva; Elizabeth Barnes; Ayan Das Gupta; Andreas Wenzel; Ian Pearce Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2017-08-12 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Lawrence P Iu; Paul Zhao; Ian Y Yeung; Nicholas S Fung; Jacky W Lee; Raymond L Wong; Victor Chong; Ian Y Wong Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2014-08-19 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Jeffrey S Heier; W Lloyd Clark; David S Boyer; David M Brown; Robert Vitti; Alyson J Berliner; Husain Kazmi; Yu Ma; Brigitte Stemper; Oliver Zeitz; Rupert Sandbrink; Julia A Haller Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2014-03-27 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: W Lloyd Clark; David S Boyer; Jeffrey S Heier; David M Brown; Julia A Haller; Robert Vitti; Husain Kazmi; Alyson J Berliner; Kristine Erickson; Karen W Chu; Yuhwen Soo; Yenchieh Cheng; Peter A Campochiaro Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2015-10-30 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Ingrid U Scott; Paul C VanVeldhuisen; Michael S Ip; Barbara A Blodi; Neal L Oden; Carl C Awh; Derek Y Kunimoto; Dennis M Marcus; John J Wroblewski; Jacqueline King Journal: JAMA Date: 2017-05-23 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Michael A Singer; Michael E Jansen; Lyndon Tyler; Paul Woods; Faisal Ansari; Udit Jain; Joshua Singer; Darren Bell; Chelsey Krambeer Journal: Clin Ophthalmol Date: 2016-12-19
Authors: Young Hwan Bae; Seong Mi Kim; Jin Young Kim; So Hyun Bae; Hakyoung Kim; Dae Joong Ma Journal: J Ophthalmol Date: 2021-09-28 Impact factor: 1.909