Disorganization of Retinal Inner Layers in Retinal Vein Occlusions: New Insights From Anti-VEGF Treatment

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
pp. 309-316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minh T. Nguyen ◽  
Aline L.B. Martins ◽  
Mia A. Heiligenstein ◽  
Barbara A. Blodi ◽  
Mihai Mititelu
Keyword(s):  
Retinal Vein Occlusion ◽  
Study Visit ◽  
University Of Wisconsin ◽  
Vein Occlusion ◽  
Anti Vegf ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The University ◽  
Endothelial Growth Factor ◽  
Retinal Vein Occlusions

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to determine the significance of disorganization of the retinal inner layers (DRIL) in patients with retinal vein occlusions (RVOs) and whether this is influenced by the choice of antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agent used. Methods: A retrospective chart study was conducted on patients with RVO and center-involved macular edema (ME) presenting to the University of Wisconsin with a minimum follow-up time of 12 months. Medical records were reviewed for demographics, vision, and imaging at baseline and 2 study visits over the course of 1 year. Two masked graders evaluated spectral-domain optical coherence tomography scans for DRIL and other features within the 1-mm-wide area centered on the foveal depression. Results: Twenty-two eyes had DRIL at baseline. DRIL resolved in 10 eyes at the first study visit, and in 2 more eyes at the second study visit. Although we could not establish an association between visual acuity (VA) and DRIL at baseline, we found a more robust correlation between DRIL extent and VA at baseline in eyes with central retinal vein occlusion/hemicentral vein occlusion compared to eyes with branch retinal vein occlusion. There was an association between DRIL improvement at the first study visit and VA improvement at the second study visit ( P = .049). However, this effect was smaller than the effect of initial VA improvement on final VA improvement. No significant difference in DRIL change was observed between the 3 anti-VEGF treatment algorithms: bevacizumab only, aflibercept only, and bevacizumab followed by aflibercept. Additionally, there was no significant correlation between RVO risk factors and change in DRIL over time. Conclusions: In our study, DRIL was not associated with VA in RVO-ME, but its resolution was predictive of VA improvement in response to anti-VEGF therapy. The choice of anti-VEGF agent (bevacizumab, aflibercept or a combination of the 2) did not affect the magnitude of DRIL resolution in RVO.

scholarly journals Retinal venous pressure is decreased after anti-VEGF therapy in patients with retinal vein occlusion–related macular edema

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teruyo Kida ◽  
Josef Flammer ◽  
Katarzyna Konieczka ◽  
Tsunehiko Ikeda
Keyword(s):  
Macular Edema ◽  
Intravitreal Injection ◽  
Retinal Vein Occlusion ◽  
Venous Pressure ◽  
Decisive Role ◽  
Retinal Venous Pressure ◽  
Vein Occlusion ◽  
Anti Vegf ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Endothelial Growth Factor

Abstract Purpose The pathomechanism leading to retinal vein occlusion (RVO) is unclear. Mechanical compression, thrombosis, and functional contractions of veins are discussed as the reasons for the increased resistance of venous outflow. We evaluated changes in the retinal venous pressure (RVP) following intravitreal injection of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agent to determine the effect on RVO-related macular edema. Methods Twenty-six patients with RVO-related macular edema (16 branch RVOs [BRVOs] and 10 central RVOs [CRVOs], age 72.5 ± 8.8 years) who visited our hospital were included in this prospective study. Visual acuity (VA), intraocular pressure (IOP), central retinal thickness (CRT) determined by macular optical coherence tomography, and RVP measured using an ophthalmodynamometer were obtained before intravitreal injection of ranibizumab (IVR) and 1 month later. Results Comparison of the BRVOs and CRVOs showed that VA was significantly improved by a single injection in BRVOs (P < 0.0001; P = 0.1087 for CRVOs), but CRT and RVP were significantly decreased without significant difference in IOP after the treatment in both groups (P < 0.0001). Conclusion The anti-VEGF treatment resulted in a significant decrease in the RVP, but the RVP remained significantly higher than the IOP. An increased RVP plays a decisive role in the formation of macula edema, and reducing it is desirable.

scholarly journals Evaluation of non-exudative microcystoid macular abnormalities secondary to retinal vein occlusion

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anibal Francone ◽  
Andrea Govetto ◽  
Lisa Yun ◽  
Juliet Essilfie ◽  
Kouros Nouri-Mahdavi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Retinal Vein Occlusion ◽  
Glaucomatous Optic Neuropathy ◽  
Vein Occlusion ◽  
Anti Vegf ◽  
History Of ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Endothelial Growth Factor ◽  
Glaucoma Group

Abstract Purpose We aimed to investigate non-exudative microcystoid macular abnormalities for visual and anatomical outcome in patients with retinal vein occlusion (RVO) with and without glaucomatous optic neuropathy (GON). Methods Medical records of 124 eyes (105 patients) with RVO were reviewed and analyzed. Eyes demonstrating microcystoid macular abnormalities were divided into 2 groups, those with evidence of glaucoma (group A) and those without glaucoma (group B). Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), the prevalence and number of microcystoid macular abnormalities, and number of intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections were compared at baseline and follow-up. Results Seventy-one out of 105 eyes (67.6%) with RVO displayed microcystoid macular abnormalities. Thirty-eight out of 71 eyes (53.5%) presented with concomitant glaucoma (group A), while the remaining 33 eyes (42.6%) had no history of glaucoma (group B). At the end of the follow-up period, mean BCVA was worse in group A versus group B (20/80 versus 20/40, respectively; p = .003). The mean number of anti-VEGF injections was 10.1 ± 9.2 in group A versus 5.9 ± 6.9 in group B (p = .03). Conclusion Eyes with RVO and concomitant glaucoma exhibited a significantly higher number of microcystoid macular abnormalities and worse BCVA versus eyes with RVO without glaucoma.

scholarly journals Effect of Alternate Treatment with Intravitreal Corticosteroid and Anti-VEGF for Macular Edema Secondary to Retinal Vein Occlusion

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Young Hwan Bae ◽  
Seong Mi Kim ◽  
Jin Young Kim ◽  
So Hyun Bae ◽  
Hakyoung Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Macular Edema ◽  
Retinal Vein Occlusion ◽  
Visual Outcome ◽  
Vascular Endothelial ◽  
Vein Occlusion ◽  
Anti Vegf ◽  
Treatment Naïve ◽  
Endothelial Growth Factor

Purpose. To evaluate whether treatment with intravitreal corticosteroid and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections alternately can improve treatment outcomes of macular edema (ME) caused by retinal vein occlusion (RVO). Methods. This dual-center retrospective study included 112 eyes with treatment-naïve ME secondary to RVO that were alternately treated with intravitreal corticosteroid and anti-VEGF injections (33 eyes, alternate group) or treated only with intravitreal anti-VEGF injections (79 eyes, anti-VEGF group) on a pro re nata basis. Results. During the 12-month follow-up period, the alternate group achieved a visual acuity gain of 0.39 logMAR, while the anti-VEGF group achieved a gain of 0.21 logMAR ( P = 0.042 ). The alternate group demonstrated a reduction in the central macular thickness of 229.9-μm, while the anti-VEGF group achieved a reduction of 220.1 μm ( P = 0.887 ). The alternate group required an average of 5.2 injections, while the anti-VEGF received 4.2 injections ( P < 0.001 ). In a propensity score-matched cohort to compensate for the differences in the injection numbers between the two groups, the alternate group achieved a better visual acuity gain than the anti-VEGF group at month 12 (0.39 logMAR vs. 0.17 logMAR, P = 0.048 ). Conclusions. In ME secondary to RVO, treatment with intravitreal corticosteroid and anti-VEGF injections alternately resulted in a more favorable visual outcome compared with intravitreal anti-VEGF monotherapy.

scholarly journals Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes for Central Retinal Vein Occlusion in the Antivascular Endothelial Growth Factor Era

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-21
Author(s):  
Jeannette Y. Stallworth ◽  
Akshay S. Thomas ◽  
Ryan Constantine ◽  
Sandra S. Stinnett ◽  
Sharon Fekrat
Keyword(s):  
Growth Factor ◽  
Retinal Vein Occlusion ◽  
Central Retinal Vein Occlusion ◽  
Treatment Patterns ◽  
Vein Occlusion ◽  
Anti Vegf ◽  
Antivascular Endothelial Growth Factor ◽  
Endothelial Growth Factor ◽  
Central Retinal Vein

Purpose: This article describes treatment patterns and visual outcomes for central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) in the antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) era. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of eyes diagnosed with CRVO between 2009 and 2016 was conducted. Treatment history and visual acuity (VA) measurements were abstracted from medical records and analyzed. Results: A total of 476 eyes of 476 patients (median age 67 years, median follow-up 25.4 months) were included. Optical coherence tomography was obtained in 93.9% and fluorescein angiography in 80% of cases on presentation. Mean VA at presentation and final visit was 20/60 and 20/94, respectively, for eyes with nonischemic CRVO, whereas that of ischemic cases remained worse than 20/800 at final follow-up. Intravitreal bevacizumab was the most common first treatment (42.2%). Intravitreal steroid was the first treatment in 3.6% and ultimately administered in 11.3% of eyes. In the first year, an average of 5.2 ± 3.6 and 2.2 ± 3.4 anti-VEGF injections were given in treatment-naive and nontreatment-naive eyes, respectively. Conclusions: In our real-world cohort, anti-VEGF injection burden and frequency are lower than in published clinical trials. Visual outcomes in both ischemic and nonischemic eyes with CRVO are poorer than expected and worse than those recorded in controlled trial settings.

scholarly journals Bevacizumab Treatment and Treatment Regimes in Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion and Macular Edema

2019 ◽  
pp. 99-103
Keyword(s):  
Macular Edema ◽  
Retinal Vein Occlusion ◽  
Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion ◽  
Vascular Endothelial ◽  
Steroid Injections ◽  
Treatment Regimes ◽  
Vein Occlusion ◽  
Bevacizumab Treatment ◽  
Endothelial Growth Factor ◽  
Retinal Vein Occlusions

Macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusions is a significant complication affecting the vision. Medical treatment of retinal vein occlusions first started with intraocular steroid injections and then enriched with intraocular Anti-VEGF (Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor) injections. But till now the length and frequency of therapy have not been defined clearly. In this review, the use of bevacizumab in the treatment of branch retinal vein occlusion and macular edema will be summarized in light of the current literature.

scholarly journals The Effect of Antivascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapy on the Development of Neovascular Glaucoma after Central Retinal Vein Occlusion: A Retrospective Analysis

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina L. Ryu ◽  
Adrian Elfersy ◽  
Uday Desai ◽  
Thomas Hessburg ◽  
Paul Edwards ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Macular Edema ◽  
Retinal Vein Occlusion ◽  
Central Retinal Vein Occlusion ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Neovascular Glaucoma ◽  
Vein Occlusion ◽  
Anti Vegf ◽  
Central Retinal Vein

Purpose. Ischemic central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) eyes are at high risk of developing neovascular glaucoma (NVG). Our purpose is to investigate the effect of anti-VEGF therapy for macular edema after CRVO on the development of neovascular glaucoma (NVG) in ischemic CRVO eyes.Methods. This is a retrospective case series of 44 eyes from 44 patients with CRVO treated with anti-VEGF therapy for macular edema. The primary outcome was the development of NVG.Results. Of the 44 eyes, 14 eyes had ischemic CRVO, and 30 eyes had nonischemic CRVO. Nonischemic eyes received a mean of 8.4 anti-VEGF doses, over mean follow-up of 24 months. One nonischemic eye (3.3%) developed NVD but not NVG. The 14 ischemic eyes received a mean of 5.6 anti-VEGF doses, with mean follow-up of 23 months. Of these 14 ischemic eyes, two eyes (14%) developed iris neovascularization and 3 eyes (21%) developed posterior neovascularization. Three of these 5 eyes with neovascularization progressed to NVG, at 19.7 months after symptom onset, on average.Conclusion. Anti-VEGF therapy for macular edema may delay, but does not prevent, the development of ocular NV in ischemic CRVO. Significant risk of NVG still exists for ischemic CRVO eyes.

Loss to Follow-Up in Patients With Retinal Vein Occlusion Undergoing Intravitreal Anti-VEGF Injections

2019 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 159-166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xinxiao Gao ◽  
Anthony Obeid ◽  
Murtaza K. Adam ◽  
Leslie Hyman ◽  
Allen C. Ho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Retinal Vein Occlusion ◽  
Loss To Follow Up ◽  
Vein Occlusion ◽  
Anti Vegf

scholarly journals Recent advances in understanding and managing retinal vein occlusions

F1000Research ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 467 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel D. Esmaili ◽  
David S. Boyer
Keyword(s):  
Retinal Vein Occlusion ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Wide Field ◽  
Intravitreal Triamcinolone ◽  
Vein Occlusion ◽  
Viable Approach ◽  
Long Acting ◽  
Endothelial Growth Factor ◽  
Central Retinal Vein ◽  
Retinal Vein Occlusions

Retinal vein occlusions are the second most common form of retinal vascular disease. Previously, laser treatment for branch retinal vein occlusion and intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide for central retinal vein occlusion were the standard of care. Recent studies have demonstrated that anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents have a superior safety and efficacy profile for the treatment of both branch and central retinal vein occlusions. The use of wide-field fluorescein angiography has also allowed better visualization of the retinal periphery. Despite the better documentation of retinal non-perfusion, laser photocoagulation to the areas of non-perfusion does not seem to result in a reduction of macular edema or reduction in treatment burden and has been relegated to patients who develop rubeosis or neovascularization of the retina. More recently, several studies have demonstrated the use of a long-acting dexamethasone implant administered intravitreally or triamcinolone administered in the suprachoroidal space as a viable approach to treat retinal vein occlusion.

Outcomes of eyes with retinal vein occlusion that are lost to follow-up after antivascular endothelial growth factor therapy

2021 ◽  
pp. bjophthalmol-2021-319180
Author(s):  
Mirataollah Salabati ◽  
Raziyeh Mahmoudzadeh ◽  
Jae-Chiang Wong ◽  
Dillan Patel ◽  
Samir N Patel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Growth Factor ◽  
Retinal Vein Occlusion ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Final Visit ◽  
Return Visit ◽  
Vein Occlusion ◽  
Antivascular Endothelial Growth Factor ◽  
Lost To Follow Up ◽  
Endothelial Growth Factor

Background/aimsTo evaluate the outcomes of eyes with macular oedema due to retinal vein occlusion (RVO) that are lost to follow-up (LTFU) after antivascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections.MethodA retrospective, single-centre, consecutive case series of RVO patients receiving injections who were LTFU >6 months was conducted. Data were collected from the visit before LTFU; return visit; 3 months, 6 months and 12 months after return; and the final visit.ResultsNinety eyes of 83 patients were included. Fifty (55.5%) eyes had branch RVO and 40 (44.5%) had central RVO. Mean LTFU duration was 277.8 days with additional mean follow-up for 748.1 days after return. Mean logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution visual acuity (VA) (Snellen) at the visit before LTFU was 0.72 (20/105) which worsened on return [1.04 (20/219), p<0.001) and remained worse at all timepoints after return: 0.92 (20/166) at 3 months (p<0.001), 0.97 (20/187) at 6 months (p<0.001), 0.94 (20/174) at 12 months (p<0.001) and 1.01 (20/205) at final visit (p<0.001). Mean central foveal thickness (CFT) increased from 252 µm at the visit before LTFU to 396 µm at the return visit (p<0.001). No difference in CFT was noted by 3 months (258 µm, p=0.71), 6 months (241 µm, p=0.54) or 12 months after return (250 µm, p=0.95). CFT was thinner at the final visit (215 µm, p=0.018).ConclusionRVO patients receiving anti-VEGF injections who were LTFU experienced a decline in VA that did not return to the levels seen before LTFU despite improvement in CFT after restarting therapy, underscoring the importance of ongoing treatment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document