Literature DB >> 35672810

Are intravitreal injections essential during the COVID-19 pandemic? Global preferred practice patterns and practical recommendations.

A C S Tan1,2,3, R Schwartz4, D Anaya5, I Chatziralli6, M Yuan7, M V Cicinelli8,9, L Faes4,10, M Mustapha11, N Phasukkijwatana12, D Pohlmann13, R Reynolds14, A Rosenblatt15, A Savastano16,17, S Touhami18, K Vaezi19, C V Ventura20,21, D Vogt22, J Ambati23, M D de Smet24,25, A Loewenstein15.   

Abstract

Tertiary outpatient ophthalmology clinics are high-risk environments for COVID-19 transmission, especially retina clinics, where regular follow-up is needed for elderly patients with multiple comorbidities. Intravitreal injection therapy (IVT) for chronic macular diseases, is one of the most common procedures performed, associated with a significant burden of care because of the vigorous treatment regimen associated with multiple investigations. While minimizing the risk of COVID-19 infection transmission is a priority, this must be balanced against the continued provision of sight-saving ophthalmic care to patients at risk of permanent vision loss. This review aims to give evidence-based guidelines on managing IVT during the COVID-19 pandemic in common macular diseases such as age-related macular degeneration, diabetic macula edema and retinal vascular disease and to report on how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected IVT practices worldwide.To illustrate some real-world examples, 18 participants in the International Retina Collaborative, from 15 countries and across four continents, were surveyed regarding pre- and during- COVID-19 pandemic IVT practices in tertiary ophthalmic centers. The majority of centers reported a reduction in the number of appointments to reduce the risk of the spread of COVID-19 with varying changes to their IVT regimen to treat various macula diseases. Due to the constantly evolving nature of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the uncertainty about the normal resumption of health services, we suggest that new solutions for eye healthcare provision, like telemedicine, may be adopted in the future when we consider new long-term adaptations required to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic.
© 2022. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Age-related macular degeneration; COVID-19; Diabetic macula edema; Intravitreal injections; Practice patterns; Recommendations

Year:  2022        PMID: 35672810      PMCID: PMC9171474          DOI: 10.1186/s40942-022-00380-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Retina Vitreous        ISSN: 2056-9920


Background

As the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-induced COVID-19 [1] emerged as a global pandemic with significant morbidity and mortality, massive disruptions in healthcare, financial, and social sectors have occurred [1]. To allow healthcare systems to adequately cope with COVID-19, governments around the world have placed strict measures in place to curb the spread of the disease. Ophthalmologists are at particularly high risk due to their close proximity to patients during slit-lamp and indirect ophthalmoscope evaluations [2]. There is also a risk of virus transmission through aerosol contact with the conjunctiva and exposed mucous membranes [2]. Retinal providers and clinics face additional challenges in crowded clinics with predominantly elderly patients, who have multiple comorbidities, requiring multiple investigations and long-waiting times [3]. Furthermore, most of these patients have sight-blinding chronic diseases such as neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), diabetic macula edema (DME), and macular edema associated with retinal vascular occlusion (ME-RVO), necessitating frequent intravitreal injection therapy (IVT), imposing a substantial burden on physicians, staff, patients, and caregivers, even in routine care. The COVID-19 pandemic imposes additional barriers to the management of retinal diseases, in terms of non-adherence to long-term treatment and follow-up regimens [4]. In addition, many health authorities and hospital management teams have mandated that, during this high-risk COVID-19 period only urgent and emergent care should be provided and that all routine clinical activity be deferred, to allow redirection of available resources to those at high risk for permanent visual loss [5, 6]. This study aims to summarize the literature, current guidelines, and evidence-based recommendations with regards to managing IVT during the COVID-19 pandemic and report on the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the visual outcomes, number of injections and adherence to follow up in IVT patients. In addition, we illustrate variability in changes to IVT practices in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the early days from examples of tertiary ophthalmic centers worldwide and provide updated evidence on recommended best practices for IVT regimens and administration.

Methods

A comprehensive literature review was performed based on a search of previous published papers (including original articles, reviews, editorials) in English, relevant to medical retina management or IVT treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic (keywords: guidelines, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, intravitreal injections, medical retina, age-related macular degeneration, diabetic macula edema, retinal vein occlusion) up to 22nd April 2022, available on the PubMed database and included published guidelines from various professional ophthalmology societies (e.g. American Academy of Ophthalmology, Royal College of Ophthalmologists, United Kingdom, Canadian Retinal Society). Data were stored using Microsoft Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, WA), and absolute and relative (%) numbers are presented. To illustrate real-world examples of the varied effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on routine IVT practice, 18 participants in the International Retina Collaborative, from 18 different cities in 15 countries and across four continents, were surveyed regarding pre- and during- COVID-19 pandemic IVT practices in tertiary ophthalmic centers (Tables 1, 2, 3). The responses were collected from 24th March to 22nd April 2020 (last response update). Participant agreement/consent was implied by completion or return of the questionnaire.
Table 1

Summary of the global routine intravitreal injection therapy (IVT) practices during the pre-COVID-19 pandemic time

Country (city/region)Type of institutionPrior to intravitreal injections being administeredIntravitreal Injection procedure
Imaging with OCT done at every visitOphthalmology consult performed at every visitSetting where the majority of IVTs are performedSkilled manpower used to administer IVTRoutine equipment used to administer IVT(Surgical mask, drape, gown, sterile gloves, speculum, iodine)Bilateral injections allowed on the same day
Asia and Pacific Region
China (Guangzhou)Tertiary stand-alone ophthalmology centreYesYesOperating theatreSenior/Junior OphthalmologistsAllNo
Israel (Tel Aviv)Ophthalmology department within General HospitalNoaNoaSeparate treatment roomSenior/Junior OphthalmologistsAll except gownsYes
Malaysia (Kuala Lumpur)Ophthalmology department within General HospitalYesYesSeparate treatment roomJunior ophthalmologistsAllYes
SingaporeTertiary stand-alone ophthalmology centreNoaNoaSeparate treatment roomSenior/Junior Ophthalmologist, Specialised nursesAll except gownsYes
Thailand (Bangkok)Ophthalmology department within General HospitalNoaNoaSeparate treatment room or stand-alone IVT clinicsSenior/Junior Ophthalmologists/ResidentsAll except gownsYes
Europe
France (Paris)Ophthalmology department within General HospitalYesYesSeparate treatment roomJunior ophthalmologistAllYes
Germany (Berlin)Tertiary stand-alone ophthalmology centreNoaNoaOperating theatreSenior ophthalmologistAll except gownsNo
Germany (Munich)Tertiary stand-alone ophthalmology centreYesYesSeparate treatment room/ Operating theatreJunior/Senior ophthalmologistAll except gownsYes
Greece (Athens)Ophthalmology department part of General HospitalYesYesSeparate treatment roomSenior/Junior OphthalmologistsAll except gownsYes
Italy (Rome)Ophthalmology department part of General HospitalNo (only after 3 loading doses)No (only after 3 loading doses)Separate treatment room / Operating theatreSenior ophthalmologistAll except gown (drape recommended)No
Italy(Milan)Ophthalmology department part of General HospitalNoaNoaSeparate treatment room/Operating theatreSenior/Junior OphthalmologistsAllNo
Switzerland (Lucerne)Ophthalmology department part of General HospitalNoNo (only at fixed time points)Operating theatreJunior Ophthalmologist, Specialised nursesAllYes
United Kingdom(London)Tertiary stand-alone ophthalmology centreYesYesSeparate treatment roomSenior/Junior Ophthalmologist, Specialised nursesAllYes
United Kingdom (Wales)Ophthalmology department part of General HospitalYesYes (most done virtually)Within the outpatient clinicSenior/Junior Ophthalmologist, Specialised nursesAll (drape and masks only recommended)Yes
North and South America
Brazil (Recife)Tertiary stand-alone ophthalmology centreYesYesOperating theatreSenior/Junior OphthalmologistAllYes
Canada (Vancouver)Tertiary stand-alone ophthalmology centreYesYesWithin the outpatient clinicSenior OphthalmologistIodine only (some substitute chlorhexidine for iodine), speculum optionalNo
Colombia (Cali)Tertiary stand-alone ophthalmology centreYesYesWithin the outpatient clinicSenior/Junior OphthalmologistAllYes
United States of America (Chicago)Ophthalmology department part of General HospitalYesYesWithin the outpatient clinicSenior ophthalmologistAll except gownYes (rarely)

aIVT also administered in injection only clinics/appointments with no imaging or ophthalmologist consult

Table 2

The global timeline of when changes to intravitreal injection therapy (IVT) practices were instituted during the COVID-19 pandemic, in the context of the magnitude of the COVID-19 problem in various countries

Country (city)Estimated date the changes startedNumber of cases of COVID-19 in the country on that dateaOther restrictions within the country at that dateMain reasons for the change in practiceChanges in practice patterns during the COVID-19 pandemic with regards to various chronic macula diseases receiving IVT
nAMDDMEME-RVO
Asia and Pacific Region
China (Guangzhou)1/2/202014,380Travel ban, lockdownHigh risk of hospital transmitted infectionsAll IVT postponed in February, given in MarchAll IVT postponed in February, given in MarchAll IVT postponed in February, given in March
Israel (Tel Aviv)17/3/2020337Travel ban, close borders, lockdownHigh risk of hospital transmitted infectionsNo IVT injections postponed, some loading doses could be extendedNo IVT injections postponed, some loading doses could be extendedNo IVT injections postponed, some loading doses could be extended
Malaysia (Kuala Lumpur)18/3/2020790Travel ban, lockdownHigh risk of hospital transmitted infectionsAll IVT postponed with exceptionsAll IVT postponed with exceptionsAll IVT postponed with exceptions
Singapore7/4/20201418Travel ban, close borders, partial lockdownHigh risk of hospital transmitted infectionsAll IVT postponed for 4 weeks except patients with only 1 seeing eye can receive IVTAll IVT postponed for 4 weeks exceptions based on clinician discretionAll IVT postponed for 4 weeks exceptions based on clinician discretion
Thailand (Bangkok)23/3/2020721Travel ban, partial lockdownHigh risk of hospital transmitted infection, Lack of resourcesSome IVT postponed except those based on individual clinician’s discretionAll IVT postponed for 2–3 monthsSome IVT injections postponed based on individual clinician’s discretion
Europe
France (Paris)16/3/20206663Complete lockdown, travel banHigh risk of hospital transmitted infectionsNo IVT injections postponedAll postponed for 2/3 months except in single eye patients or threatening situationsAll postponed for 2/3 months except in single eye patients or threatening situations
Germany (Berlin)23/3/202029056Travel ban Reduce close contacts, schools closedHigh risk of hospital transmitted infectionNo IVT injections postponedNo IVT injections postponedNo IVT injections postponed
Germany (Munich)16/3/20207272Travel ban, Reduce close contacts, schools closedHigh risk of hospital transmitted infectionNo IVT injections postponedNo IVT injections postponedNo IVT injections postponed
Greece (Athens)17/3/2020387Travel ban, Lockdown, schools closedHigh risk of hospital transmitted infectionAll IVT injections postponed, exceptions allowed based on clinician’s discretionAll IVT injections postponedAll IVT injections postponed, exceptions allowed based on clinician’s discretion
Italy (Rome)16/3/202027980Travel ban, Lockdown, Close bordersHospital policy, High risk of hospital transmitted infectionAll IVT postponed except patients with only 1 seeing eye can receive IVTAll IVT postponedAll IVT postponed
Italy (Milan)9/3/20209172Travel ban, Lockdown, Close bordersHigh risk of hospital transmitted infectionAll IVT postponed except patients with only 1 seeing eye can receive IVTAll IVT postponedAll IVT postponed except patients with neovascular glaucoma
Switzerland (Lucerne)16/3/20202353Travel ban, Lockdown, Close bordersHigh risk of hospital transmitted infectionNo IVT injections postponedNo IVT injections postponedNo IVT injections postponed
United Kingdom (London)19/3/20203269Travel ban, Lockdown, Close bordersHigh risk of hospital transmitted infectionNo IVT injections postponed but to continue on a fixed treatment regimentAll IVT postponed for 6 monthsAll IVT postponed for 6 months for BRVO, IVT given to CRVO based on clinician discretion
United Kingdom (Wales)30/3/202022,141Travel ban, Lockdown, Close bordersHigh risk of hospital transmitted infectionNo injections postponed – Extended by 4 weeks rather than 2 where neededNo injections postponed – Extended by 4 weeks rather than 2 where neededNo injections postponed – Extended by 4 weeks rather than 2 where needed
North and South America
Brazil (Recife)20/3/2020640Travel ban, quarantineHigh risk of hospital transmitted infectionFlatten the curveIVT injections postponed in elderly and high-risk patients if vision and OCT were stable on last visitSome IVT injections postponed in elderly and high-risk patients if vision and OCT were stable on last visitSome IVT injections postponed in elderly and high-risk patients if vision and OCT were stable on last visit
Canada (Vancouver)20/3/20201067Travel Ban, State of Emergency, Close bordersHigh risk of hospital transmitted infectionSome IVT injections postponed for 3-month stable patientsAll IVT injections postponedSome IVT injections postponed for 3-month stable patients
Colombia (Cali)24/3/2020378Travel Ban, State of Emergency, Lockdown, Close bordersHospital policy, High risk of hospital transmitted infectionAll IVT injections postponed for at least 1 month, exceptions allowed based on clinician’s discretionAll IVT injections postponed for at least 1 month, exceptions allowed based on clinician’s discretionAll IVT injections postponed for at least 1 month, exceptions allowed based on clinician’s discretion
United States of America (Chicago)16/3/20204596Travel restriction, lockdown

High risk of hospital transmitted infection

Limited manpower

Some IVT postponed for patient with long IVT intervals, patients with shorter IVT maintained according to clinician’s discretionSome IVT postponed for patient with long IVT intervals, patients with shorter IVT maintained according to clinician’s discretionSome IVT postponed for patient with long IVT intervals, patients with shorter IVT maintained according to clinician’s discretion

nAMD: neovascular AMD, DME: Diabetic macula edema, ME-RVO: macula edema related to retinal vein occlusion, BRVO: branch retinal vein occlusion, CRVO: central retinal vein occlusion

aData obtained from ref 73: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ unless specified otherwise

Table 3

Summary of changes to logistics and procedural practices of intravitreal injection therapy (IVT) during the COVID-19 pandemic time

Country (city/region)Prior to intravitreal injections being administeredIntravitreal Injection procedure
Screening for high risk COVID patients performed (temperature screen, symptoms, travel history)High-risk COVID patients allowed to the specialist outpatient clinic for IVTChanges to performing OCT imagingChanges to performing ophthalmology consultChanges to the setting where the majority of IVTs was performedChanges to the skilled manpower used to administer IVTChanges to the IVT administration procedure or equipment
Asia- Pacific
China(Guangzhou)YesNoNoNoYes, reduced numbers, social distancing, reduced follow up appointmentsNoNo
Israel(Tel Aviv)YesNo, deferred for 2 weeksYes, reduced OCT performedYes, reduced VA, slit-lamp examYes, Reduced numbers and social distancingAn additional injection clinic opened outside the hospitalHome injections in selected casesNoYes, face shield and gown worn. N95 mask was available at physician’s discretion
Malaysia (Kuala Lumpur)YesNo, deferredNoNoYes, reduced numbers, social distancing, reduced follow up appointmentsNoYes, face shield was worn
SingaporeYesNo, deferredYes, reduced OCT performedYes, reduced VA, slit-lamp examYes, reduced numbers, reduced time in clinic, social distancingNoYes, goggles of face-shield recommended
Thailand (Bangkok)YesYes, if no fever detectedNoNoYes, IVT clinic/OT stopped only IVT in the treatment roomNoNo
Europe
France(Paris)YesYesYes, reduced OCT performed (no OCT in patients with known interval)Yes, no slit lamp exam in patients with known intervalYes, reduced numbers, reduced time in clinic, social distancingNoNo
Germany (Berlin)Not formallyYes, obviously sick patients asked to return laterNoYes, telephone consults for patients instead of routine follow up examinationYes, reduced numbersNoNo
Germany(Munich)YesYes, high risk cases screened in isolationNoYes, only VA, IOP, OCT taken no slit lamp examYes, reduced numbersNoNo
Greece(Athens)YesNoYes, reduced OCT performedYes, reduced VA and slit-lamp examYes, reduced numbers, social distancingNoNo
Italy(Rome)YesNo, deferred for 2 weeksNoNoYes, reduced numbers, social distancingNoYes, face shields worn by all staff
Italy(Milan)YesYes, high risk cases screened in isolationNoYes, telephone consults for symptoms screeningYes, no injections in OT all IVT done in small procedures roomYes, more senior ophthalmologists performing IVT as junior staff are deployed elsewhereYes, face shields worn by all staff
Switzerland (Lucerne)NoYesYes, reduced OCT, done only in treatment naïve patients and those patients with significant vision lossYes, no routine VA, IOP and slit lamp examination telephone consults doneYes, reduced numbers, waiting time, social distancingNoNo
United Kingdom(London)YesNo, deferred for 2 weeksYes, reduced OCT performedYes, no routine VA, IOP or slit lamp exam performedYes, reduced numbers, waiting time, social distancingNoNo
United Kingdom (Wales)Yes (department dependent)No, deferred for 2 weeksYes, reduced OCT performedYes, no routine VA, IOP or slit lamp exam performed, virtual consults continueYes, reduced numbers, waiting time, social distancingNoYes, surgical mask strongly recommended
North and South America
Brazil(Recife)YesNoNoYes, included virtual consultationsYes, reduced numbers, waiting time, social distancingNoNo
Canada(Vancouver)NoYesNoYes, DME and RVO patients contacted by telephoneNoNoYes, gloves, goggles and masks for all staff, masks for any sick patients
Colombia(Cali)YesNoYes, reduced OCT performedYes, no pinhole or IOP, virtual consults where possibleNoNoYes, face shield and gown worn. N95 mask was available at physician’s discretion
United States of America (Chicago)YesYes, high risk cases screened in isolationYes, only basic OCT allowedNoYes, reduced numbers, waiting time, social distancingNoYes

VA: visual acuity, IOP: intraocular pressure, OCT: optical coherence tomography, DME: diabetic macula edema, RVO: retinal vein occlusions

Summary of the global routine intravitreal injection therapy (IVT) practices during the pre-COVID-19 pandemic time aIVT also administered in injection only clinics/appointments with no imaging or ophthalmologist consult

Results

Global pre-pandemic routine IVT practice and the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the IVT practices surveyed.

Routine clinical examination, investigations and IVT procedures performed pre-pandemic were summarized in Table 1. The approximate dates in which changes to the IVT practices occurred in respective countries are summarized in Table 2 and Fig. 1. The changes to the appointments with regards to diagnosis (nAMD, DME and ME-RVO), changes to clinical assessments and PPE use in various centers is summarized in Table 3. Factors that were likely to influence the decision to implement changes in IVT practice included: the date when the first case of COVID-19 was detected, the rate of COVID-19 infection in the community, the speed of response of the respective governments in implementing lockdown policies, and the availability of the healthcare resources (Table 2). The most common reasons cited for implementing these changes included the high risk of COVID-19 transmission and the need to comply with hospital policies. Less common reasons included a lack of manpower and resources.
Fig. 1

Timeline of the dates when changes to IVT practice occurred in the different centers surveyed and the number of COVID-19 cases on that date

The global timeline of when changes to intravitreal injection therapy (IVT) practices were instituted during the COVID-19 pandemic, in the context of the magnitude of the COVID-19 problem in various countries High risk of hospital transmitted infection Limited manpower nAMD: neovascular AMD, DME: Diabetic macula edema, ME-RVO: macula edema related to retinal vein occlusion, BRVO: branch retinal vein occlusion, CRVO: central retinal vein occlusion aData obtained from ref 73: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ unless specified otherwise Timeline of the dates when changes to IVT practice occurred in the different centers surveyed and the number of COVID-19 cases on that date Summary of changes to logistics and procedural practices of intravitreal injection therapy (IVT) during the COVID-19 pandemic time VA: visual acuity, IOP: intraocular pressure, OCT: optical coherence tomography, DME: diabetic macula edema, RVO: retinal vein occlusions

Discussion

The multiple tertiary ophthalmic centers around the world included in our study reported varying responses to changes in their IVT practice in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, with the majority of centers reducing the number of appointments to reduce the risk of the spread of COVID-19 among staff and patients. Most centers reported having routine screening for high risk COVID-19 patients and about half of the tertiary centers reported the additional use of PPE for IVT procedures (in most of the other centers full PPE was already worn pre-COVID-19 pandemic).

The recommended best practice guidelines for IVT during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The main guiding principles of planning IVT treatment in times of the COVID-19 pandemic include (1) minimizing the risk of COVID-19 infection between healthcare workers and patients; (2) continuing to provide IVT to patients to prevent permanent vision loss from the progression of their chronic macular disease [3, 7]. In addition, these decisions should be made in the context of other factors such as the number of COVID-19 cases within the country, the risk of COVID-19 transmission, the availability of healthcare resources, and government policies. A recent paper by the Vision Academy Steering Committee outlined various guidelines on the treatment regimens for various common macular diseases requiring IVT, during the time when the COVID-19 pandemic began [5, 7]. External factors, such as the strain on the healthcare system caused by the pandemic, government-imposed restrictions, and the need to reduce the risk of virus transmission all led to global recommendations in IVT delivery: the number of visits should be kept to a minimum, the time within visits shortened, exposure should be minimized to the lowest number of the staff, and priority should be given to patients at greatest risk of vision loss [2, 7]. One strategy proposed in some of our surveyed centers and in previous studies is having two types of appointments: (1) an assessment appointment performed at baseline, after the 3rd injection of the anti-VEGF loading-dose, at regular intervals after, and at physician discretion in case of reported vision loss, consisting in a VA assessment, slit-lamp examination, and OCT and (2) an injection-only appointment, where IVT only is performed without any eye assessments [3, 7]. A proactive T&E regimen is ideal during the COVID-19 pandemic, as it reduces the number of visits and injections while maintaining visual outcomes [8]. However, a disadvantage of T&E is that the decision about the next treatment interval is made based on VA measurement and OCT findings, which need to be done at every visit, adding to the time spent in the clinic and increased close contact with patients [9]. Table 4 summarizes the benefits, risks, and recommendations for each routine assessment procedures done prior to IVT. Newer intravitreal drugs or drug delivery systems such as faricimab and port-delivery systems that are being currently developed aims to increased injection intervals with the potential to further reduce the number of clinic visits [10-12].
Table 4

Benefits, risks and recommendations for assessment procedures done prior to administering intravitreal injection treatment

ProcedureBenefitsRisks during COVID-19 pandemicRisk of deferring procedureSituations where the procedure is indicatedSituations where the procedure can be deferredModifications to the procedure during COVID-19 pandemic
VA testing

Widely accepted functional visual assessment

Can be used to determine T&E decisions

Increasing contact time with patient and staff

Patients may not report vision loss

Visual outcomes less closely monitored

Treatment naïve patients

Patients who complain of visual loss

Patients receiving loading doses

Long-term patients with stable disease

Take VA starting from smallest letter and work upwards to save time

Pinhole vision may not be necessary

IOP measurementMonitor glaucoma risk in IVT patients

Increased contact time with patient and staff

Aerosolized droplets from non-contact/pneumatic tonometry

Undetected IOP rise

High risk glaucoma patients

Cupped disc

Post intravitreal steroid injection for the first time

Routine follow up

No history of glaucoma or disc cupping

Already has separate glaucoma follow-up appointment

Suspend the use of non-contact tonometry, use Goldmann applanation or I-care tonometry
Pupil dilationAllows the examination of the peripheral retinaIncreased contact time with patient and staff; spread of COVID-19 from contaminated eye dropsRisk of missing retinal pathology

Treatment naive

High myopia

Extra-foveal disease

Visual field loss

Long-term patients with stable diseaseDilation eye drops should be administered only once on arrival, if needed patient can be given disposable minims of eye drops for repeated administration
OCT

Objective structural assessment of active disease

Can be used to determine T&E decisions

Increased contact time with staff

Undetected Worsening disease activity

Early recurrence with no VA loss not detected

Missed screening of fellow eye

Treatment naïve

4 weeks after 3rd loading dose

Patients receiving loading doses

Long-term patients with stable disease

Known maximum treatment interval

Plastic shield in machines where patient faces the technician

Keep scanning protocol to a minimum

Decentralise imaging service

Slit-lamp examination

Detection on non-retinal pathology

Assessment of the retinal periphery

Detection of new areas of bleeding

Increased close contact with staff

Undetected Non-retinal pathology and peripheral retinal pathology

Undetected new retinal hemorrhages or rubeosis

Treatment naïve cases

Patients with worsening visual acuity

Patients receiving loading doses

Long-term patients with stable disease

Plastic shield in machines where patient faces the doctor

N95 masks and goggles for high risk patients

Ophthalmology consultation

Direct reporting of symptoms

Patient doctor rapport

Increased prolonged close contact with doctorUndetected pathology not picked up by imagingTreatment naïve cases

Patients receiving loading doses

Long-term patients with stable disease

To be replaced by telephone or video consultation

VA: visual acuity, IOP: intra-ocular pressure, OCT: optical coherence tomography, loading doses refer to intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy

Benefits, risks and recommendations for assessment procedures done prior to administering intravitreal injection treatment Widely accepted functional visual assessment Can be used to determine T&E decisions Patients may not report vision loss Visual outcomes less closely monitored Treatment naïve patients Patients who complain of visual loss Patients receiving loading doses Long-term patients with stable disease Take VA starting from smallest letter and work upwards to save time Pinhole vision may not be necessary Increased contact time with patient and staff Aerosolized droplets from non-contact/pneumatic tonometry High risk glaucoma patients Cupped disc Post intravitreal steroid injection for the first time Routine follow up No history of glaucoma or disc cupping Already has separate glaucoma follow-up appointment Treatment naive High myopia Extra-foveal disease Visual field loss Objective structural assessment of active disease Can be used to determine T&E decisions Undetected Worsening disease activity Early recurrence with no VA loss not detected Missed screening of fellow eye Treatment naïve 4 weeks after 3rd loading dose Patients receiving loading doses Long-term patients with stable disease Known maximum treatment interval Plastic shield in machines where patient faces the technician Keep scanning protocol to a minimum Decentralise imaging service Detection on non-retinal pathology Assessment of the retinal periphery Detection of new areas of bleeding Undetected Non-retinal pathology and peripheral retinal pathology Undetected new retinal hemorrhages or rubeosis Treatment naïve cases Patients with worsening visual acuity Patients receiving loading doses Long-term patients with stable disease Plastic shield in machines where patient faces the doctor N95 masks and goggles for high risk patients Direct reporting of symptoms Patient doctor rapport Patients receiving loading doses Long-term patients with stable disease VA: visual acuity, IOP: intra-ocular pressure, OCT: optical coherence tomography, loading doses refer to intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy

Neovascular age-related macular degeneration

Multiple lines of evidence recommend that patients with nAMD in their first two years of treatment should be prioritised [5, 7]. Previous studies on the natural history of nAMD show that delaying IVT treatment results in vision loss(control arm of MARINA and ANCHOR) [13] and quarterly IVT after the 3 monthly loading doses anti-VEGF loading doses has inferior visual outcomes compared to monthly treatment (PIER and EXCITE study). Hence, an intensive treatment regimen for nAMD should be recommended from a vision standpoint in the treatment and consent discussions during the COVID-19 pandemic, despite the risk of being infected. For treatment naïve patients, OCT and/or OCT angiography (OCTA) should be preferred for confirming the diagnosis in place of dye angiography, which is time-consuming and requires increased person-to-person contact [7]. In nAMD patients, a modified T&E approach mixed with fixed dosing interval has been proposed to minimize the need for VA, OCT, and slit-lamp examination at every visit, while avoiding the risk of under-treatment [3]. An example of this was the TriPla regimen was proposed, which was a hybrid of fixed dosing and T&E, with an aim to still provide an individualized approach but minimizing the number of examinations and risk of COVID-19 exposure [15]. The ALTAIR study showed that increasing intervals by 4 weeks in a T&E regimen with aflibercept carried no differences in the visual outcomes or the number of injections compared to the traditionally adopted 2-week extension. Results from the FLUID study also showed that visual outcomes are comparable using a relaxed approach in patients versus a strict no tolerance to subretinal fluid approach. This meant that IVT interval for patients with stable VA and minimal stable subretinal fluid could continue to be extended as long as they did not deteriorate [14]. These added treatment strategies may also help in reducing the number of follow-up visits.

Diabetic macular edema and diabetic retinopathy

Diabetic patients are at higher risk of COVID-19 complications; therefore, extra care should be provided to these patients to minimize the risk of infection. General recommendations for DME management are to defer all IVT treatments and follow-up unless the patient is monocular, has significant vision loss from DME, or has severe non-proliferative or proliferative diabetic retinopathy (in this case, pan-retinal photocoagulation should be considered) [5, 7]. Previous studies have shown that the long-term risk of vision loss in DME patients is lower than in nAMD (control/laser arms of RISE, RIDE, RESTORE, VIVID, VISTA) [16]. In treatment naïve patients, a delay in anti-VEGF IVT treatment may result in a higher risk of suboptimal long-term visual outcomes (crossover arms RISE, RIDE,VIVID, and VISTA, RESTORE extension study). Hence, for both treatment naïve and DME patient on treatment, guidelines state that follow-up appointments should be deferred, but should not be postponed for more than 4–6 months as this could lead to irreversible vision loss [7, 17]. When treatment is initiated, 6 monthly loading anti-VEGF injection doses (as recommended by the DRCRnet: Protocol T) can be performed as an injection-only appointment to reduce time spent in the clinic. Sustained-release intravitreal corticosteroid implants can also be considered as an alternative therapy in suitable patients to adequately treat DME and reduce the number of injections and follow-up visits, however additional visits for intra-ocular pressure checks may be required in higher risk cases.

Macular edema related to retinal vein occlusion

Similar to DME, natural history studies show the risk of long-term vision loss from ME-RVO is low (control arms-VIBRANT, CRUISE, CORPENICUS, and GALILEO). Nevertheless, macular edema associated with central retinal vein occlusion (ME-CRVO) can be associated with a higher risk of suboptimal long-term visual outcomes in case of significant delay in anti-VEGF IVT treatment (crossover arms, CRUISE, COPERNICUS, and GALILEO). Recommendations for macular edema associated with branch retinal vein occlusion (ME-BRVO) is to defer all IVT treatments. Intensive monthly IVT anti-VEGF loading doses (done as injection only appointments) are recommended for the treatment naïve ME-CRVO [7]. In patients with ME-CRVO treated with monthly bevacizumab or ranibizumab, that have persistent activity or have recurrences, when monthly intervals are extended past 4 weeks, a switch to aflibercept or the dexamethasone implant may allow increased treatment intervals (NEWTON, SCORE 2).

Reducing the risk of COVID-19 transmission within the IVT clinic

Recommendations to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission within the clinic include well-organized efforts to reschedule appointments for non-urgent patients, by giving them clear advice to postpone their visits and to contact the hospital only if their condition deteriorates or they require a prescription for drug-refill [2, 7]. Increased manpower should be provided for walk-in or emergency services, to address a potential rise in patients whose appointments have been rescheduled. Clear communications on public health recommendations should be given to patients before they attend the clinic, which include limiting accompanying persons, social distancing, hand hygiene, and wearing masks at all times (Fig. 2) [2, 7]. As countries start to relax confinement measures, patients will need to be continually reminded of the importance of maintaining a high degree of vigilance and compliance to all the public health recommendations specified above while within hospitals and clinics.
Fig. 2

An example of a pre-screening counter for COVID-19 located at the entrance of the tertiary center (top left image), a government supported digital application (top right image) is used to record the patients entry details, symptoms, previous exposure to Covid-19 and travel history (also used for contact tracing if needed), an automatic thermal scanner (top right image) to detect patients with a fever as they enter the center. Examples of signs on clinic waiting room seats used to encourage social distancing (left image) and an example of patients in the waiting room of the clinic (right image) and staff wearing surgical masks and practicing social distancing

An example of a pre-screening counter for COVID-19 located at the entrance of the tertiary center (top left image), a government supported digital application (top right image) is used to record the patients entry details, symptoms, previous exposure to Covid-19 and travel history (also used for contact tracing if needed), an automatic thermal scanner (top right image) to detect patients with a fever as they enter the center. Examples of signs on clinic waiting room seats used to encourage social distancing (left image) and an example of patients in the waiting room of the clinic (right image) and staff wearing surgical masks and practicing social distancing PPE is extremely important to prevent COVID-19 transmission, and it is recommended that at the very least surgical masks are worn by staff, patients, and caregivers [2, 7] (Fig. 3). Routine screening for respiratory symptoms, travels, or previous COVID-19 contact history, 2–14 days prior to the clinic visit, and temperature checks on arrival, have been recommended for all patients and caregivers before entering the eye clinic (Fig. 2) [2]. Some studies have suggested an increased risk of endophthalmitis associated with surgical masks worn by patients [18, 19], however a large multi-center study, showed no difference in the culture positive endophthalmitis rates between cohorts with no masks and those where both patients and physicians wore masks [20]. Prolonged mask wear of more than 4 h was also suggested as having a higher bacterial load that can be reduced with povidone iodine administration [21]. Taping of the top of masks or using a sealed drape before IVT administration has also been suggested as another alternative to decrease aerosolized particles from the patient’s mouth that may carry oral pathogens [22].
Fig. 3

Decentralized home intravitreal therapy (IVT) service shown by the map illustrating the planned route of the home IVT service (left image), medical staff carrying the portable home IVT equipment (middle image) and medical team administering IVT to a patient at his home (left image

Decentralized home intravitreal therapy (IVT) service shown by the map illustrating the planned route of the home IVT service (left image), medical staff carrying the portable home IVT equipment (middle image) and medical team administering IVT to a patient at his home (left image In general, all assessment procedures should be kept to a minimum and deferred where possible (Table 4). Suggested modifications to respective procedures are outlined to minimize the total time taken and contact with staff which include adequate social distance, with a clear outlined delineation between surfaces in contact with the patient and staff. A recent study described the development of a new intravitreal injection center based on “LEAN” principles (creating more value for customers with fewer resources, minimizing waste), resulting in better quality and efficiency, speed of the overall procedures and clinical capacity of the IVT service, with an aim to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission [23]. Recently revised recommendations released by the Vision Academy Steering Committee, included guidelines on IVT treatment based on the local epidemic pressure, to ensure the safety of patients and staff and the sustainability of healthcare resources, in era of easing COVID-19 measures leading to a resurgence of disease in many areas [17]. Apart from local epidemic pressure, the vaccination rates should also be considered when assessing the risk of COVID-19 transmission during IVT [17]. In particular, due to the long lasting effect of endemic COVID-19, there was an emphasis on maintaining treatment intervals wherever possible to avoid risk of permanent visual changes especially in patients with DME and BRVO who have had their treatment postponed for more than 6 months during the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic [17]. There also should be a shift towards telemedicine, with models of care such as virtual clinics, where clinical decisions are based on imaging such as color fundus photography and OCT. Patients are then contacted remotely and their management plan conveyed through phone, messaging service, or video consultation [17, 24–26]. In further efforts to reduce crowding in the tertiary centers, decentralization of services into the community, such as primary eye care centers, imaging centers, satellite clinics, and even home intravitreal services can be considered (Fig. 3) [24, 27]. The COVID-19 pandemic presents a unique opportunity to incentivize governments and insurance companies to provide healthcare remuneration for new services and initiatives [24].

The effect of COVID-19 on IVT adherence rates and visual acuity outcomes of patients receiving IVT

The added challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, such as the fear of visiting hospitals for appointments, difficulties with accessing healthcare, rescheduling missed appointments, and the reduced patient capacity of hospitals and eye clinics to maintain adequate social distancing may increase the risk of non-adherence to IVT. Overall, numerous studies worldwide report the adherence rates for IVT being reduced significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic [28-31]. One Italian study reported better adherence rates associated with younger patients, worser vision in fellow eye and during period of no lockdown [28]. A German study reported that during the first wave [32]of the pandemic, risk factors for poor adherence included low VA of the treated eye, high VA of the untreated eye, COVID-19 in the family and DME [31]. A French study also reported, that during lockdown, there was a relatively marked decrease in IVT procedures that did not return to pre-lockdown levels despite subsequent opening up [30]. Even though overall IVT numbers have decreased during the pandemic and immediately post-pandemic, it will be inevitable in the endemic COVID-19 era, that there will be a “rebound” number of patients who will need IVT treatment, that may have a delayed presentation with more advanced disease [33]. Fight Retinal Blindness Registry is a large international data base that published data from 8 countries showed that 6 month drop-out rates were higher for ME-RVO (28%), DME (27%) and lower for AMD (20%) [34]. Eyes with AMD loss more vision in proportion with the number of injections than eyes with DME or ME-RVO [34]. Other studies have also reported significant short term and long term vision loss in all patients receiving IVT [35], especially AMD patients who have had lapses in treatment due to COVID-19 [29, 32, 36]. Interestingly, one study reported that AMD eyes with active disease, with a high injection demand (intervals less than 6 weeks) were able to be extended to 10–12 weeks with stable VA, however when intervals were extended to more than 12 weeks there was a risk short term vision loss [37]. A Chinese study, reported that patients on the T&E regiment versus those on pro nata (prn) regimen showed better visual outcomes when their therapy was halted during COVID-19 especially in eyes with Type 1 neovascularisation [38]. Devastating VA outcomes due to submacular hemorrhages in AMD eyes have also been reported when IVT treatment was delayed due to COVID-19 [39, 40]. In contrast to the current UK guidelines, recommending delaying all ME-RVO injections [5], one UK-based study showed that when IVT was delayed and then restarted, more DME eyes were able to regain vision, however VA in nAMD and ME-RVO eyes were less likely to return to baseline [41]. Another study examining the short- and long-term effects of delayed IVT of more than 8 weeks, showed that in the short-term vision loss was more marked in the DR and CRVO eyes compared to nAMD, while long-term vision loss was more commonly observed in CRVO and nAMD eyes, with BRVO patients least effected by the IVT delay [42]. Patient adherence in this setting may be improved through other solutions that include digital interactive education programs, digital home monitoring programs [43], a hotline that gives direct access to doctors or nurses counselors, an online appointment scheduling service and private video consultation services [7].

Conclusion

In this review, we summarize the current IVT recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic and justify these recommendations based on previous published pivotal trials and current published studies, outlining the effects of the COVID pandemic on various retinal diseases treated with IVT. We describe the effect COVID-19 with both published reports and real-world examples from various tertiary centers around the world and suggest recommendations that may improve future resilience in providing continued IVT for patients with chronic retinal diseases despite challenges from the pandemic.
  39 in total

Review 1.  TREAT-AND-EXTEND REGIMENS WITH ANTI-VEGF AGENTS IN RETINAL DISEASES: A Literature Review and Consensus Recommendations.

Authors:  K Bailey Freund; Jean-François Korobelnik; Robert Devenyi; Carsten Framme; John Galic; Edward Herbert; Hans Hoerauf; Paolo Lanzetta; Stephan Michels; Paul Mitchell; Jordi Monés; Carl Regillo; Ramin Tadayoni; James Talks; Sebastian Wolf
Journal:  Retina       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 4.256

2.  The prognostic value of peripheral retinal nonperfusion in diabetic retinopathy using ultra-widefield fluorescein angiography.

Authors:  Fares Antaki; Razek Georges Coussa; Mikel Mikhail; Cyril Archambault; David E Lederer
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-07-16       Impact factor: 3.117

3.  Efficacy, durability, and safety of intravitreal faricimab up to every 16 weeks for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (TENAYA and LUCERNE): two randomised, double-masked, phase 3, non-inferiority trials.

Authors:  Jeffrey S Heier; Arshad M Khanani; Carlos Quezada Ruiz; Karen Basu; Philip J Ferrone; Christopher Brittain; Marta S Figueroa; Hugh Lin; Frank G Holz; Vaibhavi Patel; Timothy Y Y Lai; David Silverman; Carl Regillo; Balakumar Swaminathan; Francesco Viola; Chui Ming Gemmy Cheung; Tien Y Wong
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2022-01-24       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Efficacy, durability, and safety of intravitreal faricimab with extended dosing up to every 16 weeks in patients with diabetic macular oedema (YOSEMITE and RHINE): two randomised, double-masked, phase 3 trials.

Authors:  Charles C Wykoff; Francis Abreu; Anthony P Adamis; Karen Basu; David A Eichenbaum; Zdenka Haskova; Hugh Lin; Anat Loewenstein; Shaun Mohan; Ian A Pearce; Taiji Sakamoto; Patricio G Schlottmann; David Silverman; Jennifer K Sun; John A Wells; Jeffrey R Willis; Ramin Tadayoni
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2022-01-24       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 5.  Fundamental principles of an anti-VEGF treatment regimen: optimal application of intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy of macular diseases.

Authors:  Paolo Lanzetta; Anat Loewenstein
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-05-19       Impact factor: 3.117

6.  Response to letter: COVID-19 and macular edema-a necessary blindness?

Authors:  Jean-François Korobelnik
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-07-18       Impact factor: 3.117

7.  End-of-Study Results for the Ladder Phase 2 Trial of the Port Delivery System with Ranibizumab for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration.

Authors:  Arshad M Khanani; David Callanan; Richard Dreyer; Sanford Chen; James G Howard; J Jill Hopkins; Chin-Yu Lin; Meike Lorenz-Candlin; Sneha Makadia; Shienal Patel; Tammy Tam; Shamika Gune
Journal:  Ophthalmol Retina       Date:  2020-11-18

8.  Association of treatment adherence with real-life VA outcomes in AMD, DME, and BRVO patients.

Authors:  Christoph Ehlken; Mandy Helms; Daniel Böhringer; Hansjürgen T Agostini; Andreas Stahl
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-12-20

9.  Stepping up infection control measures in ophthalmology during the novel coronavirus outbreak: an experience from Hong Kong.

Authors:  Tracy H T Lai; Emily W H Tang; Sandy K Y Chau; Kitty S C Fung; Kenneth K W Li
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-03-03       Impact factor: 3.535

Review 10.  World Health Organization declares global emergency: A review of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19).

Authors:  Catrin Sohrabi; Zaid Alsafi; Niamh O'Neill; Mehdi Khan; Ahmed Kerwan; Ahmed Al-Jabir; Christos Iosifidis; Riaz Agha
Journal:  Int J Surg       Date:  2020-02-26       Impact factor: 6.071

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.