-
1.
How do we evaluate the role of focal/grid photocoagulation in the treatment of diabetic macular edema?
Blindbaek, SL, Peto, T, Grauslund, J
Acta ophthalmologica. 2019;(4):339-346
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors (anti-VEGF) have consistently demonstrated efficacy and safety and changed both the aim and perspectives of diabetic macular edema (DME) treatment. Hence, the present and future role of focal/grid laser photocoagulation in DME treatment has been subjected to some debate. However, extensive insight into technical advances in novel laser systems, treatment protocols of anti-VEGF trials and the functional impact of modern focal/grid photocoagulation is needed to evaluate the present and future role of photocoagulation in DME treatment. Across a wide range of clinical trials laser therapy was required as adjunctive/rescue treatment in approximately 20-50% of patients receiving anti-VEGF monotherapy for centre involving DME. Further, a lower retreatment rate and a more stable reduction in retinal thickness have been demonstrated in more studies. However, lacking information on the laser systems used, their technical specifications and protocols of application often complicates direct comparison of results in anti-VEGF trials. Hence, this paper aimed to provide an overview of the currently available data relevant to the potential role of focal/grid laser photocoagulation in DME treatment including a thorough overview of the current most commonly used laser systems. Results with subthreshold diode micropulse laser photocoagulation are intriguing and may offer a valuable option as adjunctive therapy to anti-VEGF treatment. However, more well-designed studies on combination therapy are warranted to determine the full potential of modern retinal photocoagulation systems. In conclusion, current data suggest that focal/grid laser therapy should still be an option for consideration as adjunctive therapy in many patients.
-
2.
The Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network (DRCR.net) and Its Contributions to the Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy.
Sun, JK, Jampol, LM
Ophthalmic research. 2019;(4):225-230
Abstract
Over the past two decades, the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network (now known as the DRCR Retina Network) has contributed to multiple and substantial advances in the clinical care of diabetic eye disease. Network studies helped establish anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents as an effective alternative to panretinal photocoagulation for eyes with proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) and as first-line therapy for eyes with visual impairment for diabetic macular edema (DME), defined treatment algorithms for the use of intravitreal medications in these conditions, and provided critical data to understand how to better evaluate the diabetic eye using optical coherence tomography and other imaging modalities. Ongoing DRCR.net studies will address whether anti-VEGF therapy is effective at preventing vision-threatening complications in eyes with severe non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy, if photobiomodulation has a beneficial effect in eyes with DME, and whether initiation of DME treatment with bevacizumab and rescue with aflibercept can provide visual outcomes as good as those achieved with aflibercept alone. Future plans for the Network also include the expansion into non-diabetic eye disease in areas such as age-related macular degeneration.
-
3.
Sickle cell retinopathy. A focused review.
Abdalla Elsayed, MEA, Mura, M, Al Dhibi, H, Schellini, S, Malik, R, Kozak, I, Schatz, P
Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie. 2019;(7):1353-1364
Abstract
PURPOSE To provide a focused review of sickle cell retinopathy in the light of recent advances in the pathogenesis, multimodal retinal imaging, management of the condition, and migration trends, which may lead to increased prevalence of the condition in the Western world. METHODS Non-systematic focused literature review. RESULTS Sickle retinopathy results from aggregation of abnormal hemoglobin in the red blood cells in the retinal microcirculation, leading to reduced deformability of the red blood cells, stagnant blood flow in the retinal precapillary arterioles, thrombosis, and ischemia. This may be precipitated by hypoxia, acidosis, and hyperosmolarity. Sickle retinopathy may result in sight threatening complications, such as paracentral middle maculopathy or sequelae of proliferative retinopathy, such as vitreous hemorrhage and retinal detachment. New imaging modalities, such as wide-field imaging and optical coherence tomography angiography, have revealed the microstructural features of sickle retinopathy, enabling earlier diagnosis. The vascular growth factor ANGPTL-4 has recently been identified as a potential mediator of progression to proliferative retinopathy and may represent a possible therapeutic target. Laser therapy should be considered for proliferative retinopathy in order to prevent visual loss; however, the evidence is not very strong. With recent development of wide-field imaging, targeted laser to ischemic retina may prove to be beneficial. Exact control of intraoperative intraocular pressure, including valved trocar vitrectomy systems, may improve the outcomes of vitreoretinal surgery for complications, such as vitreous hemorrhage and retinal detachment. Stem cell transplantation and gene therapy are potentially curative treatments, which may prevent retinopathy. CONCLUSIONS There is lack of evidence regarding the optimal management of sickle retinopathy. Further study is needed to determine if recent progress in the understanding of the pathophysiology and diagnosis of sickle retinopathy may translate into improved management and outcome.
-
4.
Literature review informs clinical guidelines for pain management during screening and laser photocoagulation for retinopathy of prematurity.
Pirelli, A, Savant Levet, P, Garetti, E, Ancora, G, Merazzi, D, Bellieni, CV, Lago, P, ,
Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992). 2019;(4):593-599
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this study was to carry out a literature review and develop clinical guidelines for pain prevention and control during screening and laser photocoagulation for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). METHODS The Italian Society of Neonatology assessed papers published between 1986 and June 2017 and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach, to develop new guidelines on pain and ROP. RESULTS The Society's pain experts assessed the full texts of 47 papers, including randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials and case-control studies on nonpharmacological and pharmacological measures used in NICUs during the screening and laser photocoagulation of neonates for ROP. The literature suggested methods for reducing the stress and pain associated with ROP screening procedures. The panel concluded that the literature showed that it was feasible to provide laser photocoagulation for ROP in spontaneously breathing patients with adequate analgesia. CONCLUSION This literature review on managing pain in infants with ROP in NICUs led to the development of national guidelines, which will help physicians and nurses to reduce the stress and pain experienced by premature newborn infants during unavoidable screening and treatment for ROP.
-
5.
Comparison of efficacy between anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and laser treatment in Type-1 and threshold retinopathy of prematurity (ROP).
Li, Z, Zhang, Y, Liao, Y, Zeng, R, Zeng, P, Lan, Y
BMC ophthalmology. 2018;(1):19
Abstract
BACKGROUND Retinopathy of Prematurity (ROP) is one of the most common causes of childhood blindness worldwide. Comparisons of anti-VEGF and laser treatments in ROP are relatively lacking, and the data are scattered and limited. The objective of this meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of both treatments in type-1 and threshold ROP. METHODS A comprehensive literature search on ROP treatment was conducted using PubMed and Embase up to March 2017 in all languages. Major evaluation indexes were extracted from the included studies by two authors. The fixed-effects and random-effects models were used to measure the pooled estimates. The test of heterogeneity was performed using the Q statistic. RESULTS Ten studies were included in this meta-analysis. Retreatment incidence was significantly increased for anti-VEGF (OR 2.52; 95% CI 1.37 to 4.66; P = 0.003) compared to the laser treatment, while the incidences of eye complications (OR 0.29; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.82; P = 0.02) and myopia were significantly decreased with anti-VEGF compared to the laser treatment. However, there was no difference in the recurrence incidence (OR 1.86; 95% CI 0.37 to 9.40; P = 0.45) and time between treatment and retreatment (WMD 7.54 weeks; 95% CI 2.00 to 17.08; P = 0.12). CONCLUSION This meta-analysis indicates that laser treatment may be more efficacious than anti-VEGF treatment. However, the results of this meta-analysis also suggest that laser treatment may cause more eye complications and increase myopia. Large-scale prospective RCTs should be performed to assess the efficacy and safety of anti-VEGF versus laser treatment in the future.
-
6.
Diabetic macular edema: Evidence-based management.
Browning, DJ, Stewart, MW, Lee, C
Indian journal of ophthalmology. 2018;(12):1736-1750
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Diabetic macular edema (DME) is the most common cause of vision loss in patients with diabetic retinopathy with an increasing prevalence tied to the global epidemic in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Its pathophysiology starts with decreased retinal oxygen tension that manifests as retinal capillary hyperpermeability and increased intravascular pressure mediated by vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) upregulation and retinal vascular autoregulation, respectively. Spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) is the cornerstone of clinical assessment of DME. The foundation of treatment is metabolic control of hyperglycemia and blood pressure. Specific ophthalmic treatments include intravitreal anti-VEGF drug injections, intravitreal corticosteroid injections, focal laser photocoagulation, and vitrectomy, but a substantial fraction of eyes respond incompletely to all of these modalities resulting in visual loss and disordered retinal structure and vasculature visible on SD-OCT and OCT angiography. Efforts to close the gap between the results of interventions within randomized clinical trials and in real-world contexts, and to reduce the cost of care increasingly occupy innovation in the social organization of ophthalmic care of DME. Pharmacologic research is exploring other biochemical pathways involved in retinal vascular homeostasis that may provide new points of intervention effective in those cases unresponsive to current treatments.
-
7.
Guidelines for the Management of Diabetic Macular Edema by the European Society of Retina Specialists (EURETINA).
Schmidt-Erfurth, U, Garcia-Arumi, J, Bandello, F, Berg, K, Chakravarthy, U, Gerendas, BS, Jonas, J, Larsen, M, Tadayoni, R, Loewenstein, A
Ophthalmologica. Journal international d'ophtalmologie. International journal of ophthalmology. Zeitschrift fur Augenheilkunde. 2017;(4):185-222
Abstract
Diabetic retinal disease is envisioned to become the plague of the coming decades with a steep increase of worldwide diabetes incidence followed by a substantial rise in retinal disease. Improvements in diagnostic and therapeutic care have to cope with this dilemma in a clinically and socioeconomically efficient manner. Laser treatment has found a less destructive competitor in pharmacological treatments. As a consequence of recent rigorous clinical trials, laser photocoagulation is no longer recommended for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME), and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy has emerged as first-line therapy. Steroids have maintained a role in the management of chronically persistent DME. The paradigm shifts in therapy are accompanied by a substantial break-through in diagnostics. The following guidance for the management of DME has been composed from the best updated knowledge of leading experts in Europe and represents another volume in the series of EURETINA recommendations for the management of retinal disease.
-
8.
Is Laser Still Important in Diabetic Macular Edema as Primary or Deferral Therapy?
Battaglia Parodi, M, Bandello, F
Developments in ophthalmology. 2017;:125-130
Abstract
Laser treatment was used in the past to reduce the visual loss due to diabetic macular edema. The recent advent of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) has completely revolutionized the management of diabetic retinopathy, with a significant improvement in the overall prognosis. Nevertheless, macular laser can still be applied in selected cases characterized by retinal thickness ≤400 microns, high visual acuity, extrafoveal location, and contraindications to the intravitreal approach with anti-VEGF and steroids. In addition, the combined therapy with anti-VEGF and macular laser can exploit the synergistic effects of both therapies, leading to a simpler and more practical management of patients over the long-term follow-up.
-
9.
A Review of Subthreshold Micropulse Laser for Treatment of Macular Disorders.
Scholz, P, Altay, L, Fauser, S
Advances in therapy. 2017;(7):1528-1555
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Micropulse laser treatment is an alternative to the conventional continuous-wave laser for the treatment of retinal or macular diseases. In contrast to the conventional laser, the therapeutic effect of the subthreshold micropulse laser is not accompanied by thermal retinal damage. This fact is of particular importance when a treatment near the fovea is required. Micropulse treatment is applied in indications such as central serous chorioretinopathy (CSC), diabetic macular edema (DME), or macular edema due to retinal vein occlusion (RVO). This review outlines and discusses the published literature of subthreshold micropulse laser treatment for CSC, DME, and macular edema after RVO.
-
10.
Practical Lessons from Protocol I for the Management of Diabetic Macular Edema.
Mukkamala, L, Bhagat, N, Zarbin, MA
Developments in ophthalmology. 2017;:91-108
Abstract
Protocol I, a multicenter randomized clinical trial, compared the visual outcomes of patients treated with 0.5 mg intravitreal ranibizumab with either prompt or deferred (by 24 weeks laser), 4 mg intravitreal triamcinolone with prompt laser, or sham injection with prompt laser for the treatment of center-involving diabetic macular edema (DME). A total of 854 adult patients with type I or II diabetes and any level of non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy or proliferative retinopathy with adequate panretinal photocoagulation, with best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of 78 to 24 ETDRS letters (Snellen equivalent of 20/32 to 20/320) and visual loss attributed to macular edema, or retinal thickening with central subfield thickness of at least 250 µm by OCT were enrolled. The main outcomes relevant for practicing clinicians are as follows. (1) Intravitreal ranibizumab treatment provides superior visual outcomes compared to conventional laser treatment. (2) Adjunctive laser treatment does not appear to provide substantial visual benefit compared to ranibizumab treatment alone, but may reduce the number of injections required to resolve DME. Deferral of laser is likely beneficial in patients with worse initial visual acuity. (3) Intravitreal triamcinolone provides similar visual outcomes compared to intravitreal ranibizumab in pseudophakic patients but is associated with a clinically important increased risk of increased intraocular pressure (IOP), need for glaucoma medications, and need for glaucoma surgery. (4) Delayed initiation of intravitreal ranibizumab therapy provides improved visual outcome among patients initially treated with conventional laser photocoagulation or triamcinolone, but the magnitude of the benefit is not as great as is observed when ranibizumab treatment is initiated promptly. (5) The number of ranibizumab injections required to achieve the desired visual outcome decreases substantially after the first year, with the majority of patients not requiring further treatment after 3 years. (6) Patients who do not have a rapid response to ranibizumab still display long-term benefit to continued therapy, although perhaps less than those with immediate improvement. (7) Intravitreal ranibizumab is not only effective in reducing retinal edema and improving BCVA among patients with DME, it is also a disease modifying therapy and induces improvement of the diabetic retinopathy severity score by 2 or more steps in approximately one third of patients. Triamcinolone injection also induces improvement in diabetic retinopathy severity in DME patients, but perhaps to a lesser degree. (8) No increased risk of systemic adverse events was observed among patients treated with intravitreal ranibizumab compared to sham-injected controls or triamcinolone-treated patients, but the low frequency of adverse events, restrictive enrollment criteria, and specific posology employed in this study limit the generalization of this conclusion to patients routinely encountered in clinical practice. (9) There was no clinically important increased risk of major ocular complications among patients treated with intravitreal ranibizumab (including the risk of glaucoma), although endophthalmitis is a potentially devastating outcome should it occur. In addition to the risk of endophthalmitis, intravitreal triamcinolone injection was associated with clinically important increased risk of cataract progression and increased IOP.