Conduite à tenir face au risque d’hypertonie oculaire après injection intra-vitréenne

[Late steroid-induced ocular hypertension after intravitreal dexamethasone implants: A series of 20 cases]

INTRODUCTION

Steroid-induced ocular hypertension (OHT) occurs in approximately one third of cases after dexamethasone implant (DEXi) injection. Among these, more than one fifth occur after the third DEXi intravitreal injection (IVI). Our goal was to analyze the clinical profiles of these late responders.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A real-life, retrospective, observational study was conducted to assess demographic characteristics and intraocular pressure (IOP) responses in late responders (IOP ≥ 21mmHg, n DEXi ≥ 4). The following parameters were analyzed: IOP 2 months after IVI and number of glaucoma medications needed. The IOP response compared to baseline was defined as low (< +6mmHg), moderate (≤ +15mmHg) or high (> 15mmHg).

RESULTS

Late steroid-induced OHT occurred in 20.8% of cases. Twenty eyes (18 patients) were included. The mean duration of follow-up was 3.8±1.9 years. They received a mean number of 9.5±4.2 IVI. The first OHT peak, measured at 25.3±3.2mmHg (21-31), occurred after 6.8±2.3 IVI. Approximately 65% of OHT spikes occurred between the fourth and sixth IVI; 35% occurred later. At maximum, 1.7±1.0 glaucoma medications and 0.75±0.79 SLT procedures were required to control the OHT, with no filtering surgery required. The ratio of "low," "moderate," and "high" responders was 5%, 85% and 10% respectively.

CONCLUSION

Late steroid-induced OHT occurs after at least 3 DEXi in one fifth of multi-injected patients, requiring long-term IOP monitoring. This case series identifies mostly moderate responder profiles, whose IOP rise often remains well-controlled with medical management or laser treatment (SLT).

Ocular hypertension and intravitreal steroids injections, update in 2023. French guidelines of the French glaucoma society and the French ophthalmology society

These guidelines are a consensus of French glaucoma and retina experts on the management of ocular hypertension (OHT) observed in a third of the cases after corticosteroid implant intravitreal injections. They update the first guidelines published in 2017. Two implants are marketed in France: the dexamethasone implant (DEXi) and the fluocinolone acetonide implant (FAci). It is essential to assess the pressure status before injecting a patient with a corticosteroid implant. A molecule-specific monitoring of the intraocular pressure is needed throughout the follow-up and at the time of reinjections. Real-life studies have allowed optimizing the management algorithm by significantly increasing the safety of these implants. Corticosteroid testing with DEXi should be performed before switching to FAci to optimize pressure tolerance of FAci. Beyond topical hypotensive treatments, selective laser trabeculoplasty may be considered in the therapeutic arsenal for the management of steroid-induced OHT and subsequent injections.

[Intraocular pressure elevation and intravitreal steroid implant injection: State of the art in 2023. Recommendations of the French Glaucoma Society and French Ophthalmology Society [French version]]

These are the recommendations of French glaucoma and retina experts on the management of ocular hypertension (OHT) observed in 1/3 of cases after intravitreal steroid implant injections. They are an update to the recommendations first published in 2017. There are two implants on the French market: the dexamethasone (DEXi) and fluocinolone acetonide (FAci) implants. It is important to know the pressure status before injecting a patient with a steroid implant. Monitoring of the IOP adapted to the specific drug is necessary throughout follow-up and reinjections. Real-life studies have made it possible to optimize the management algorithm by significantly increasing the safety of use of these implants. A corticosteroid test with DEXi is necessary before switching to FAci to optimize the pressure tolerance of the latter. In addition to topical glaucoma medications, SLT laser can be considered in the therapeutic arsenal for the management of steroid-induced OHT and future injections.

Exploring the Relationship between Anti-VEGF Therapy and Glaucoma: Implications for Management Strategies

A short-term increase in intraocular pressure (IOP) is a common side effect after intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy, but a sustained increase in IOP with the development of secondary glaucoma has also been reported in some studies after repeated intravitreal anti-VEGF injections. The aim of this review is to present and discuss the possible pathophysiological mechanisms and factors contributing to a sustained rise in IOP, as well as treatment strategies for patients at risk. Close monitoring and adjustable IOP-lowering treatment are recommended for high-risk patients, including those with glaucoma, angle-closure anomalies, ocular hypertension or family history of glaucoma; patients receiving a high number of injections or at shorter intervals; and patients with capsulotomy. Strategies are needed to identify patients at risk in a timely manner and to prevent sustained elevation of IOP.

REAL WORLD STUDY COMPARING PHAKIC VERSUS PSEUDOPHAKIC EYES IN DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA TREATED WITH DEXAMETHASONE IMPLANT: The PHAKIDEX Study

PURPOSE

Dexamethasone implant (DEX-implant) is one treatment choice in diabetic macular edema. However, steroid-induced cataract is a common complication when treating a chronic disease and could lead to vision loss. Because of the lack of studies specifically focused on the functional outcomes according to the lens status, the authors therefore aim to analyze the effectiveness and safety of DEX-implant treatment for diabetic macular edema in phakic versus pseudophakic eyes.

METHODS

This multicenter, retrospective study conducted in France included eyes of consecutive patients who had received a DEX-implant for diabetic macular edema.

RESULTS

A total of 328 eyes were included: 158 eyes (48.2%) were phakic, 167 eyes (50.9%) were pseudophakic and three were unknown. According to the lens status, mean change in best-corrected visual acuity from baseline was never significantly different between phakic and pseudophakic eyes (likelihood ratio test, P = 0.09) nor in the change in central macular thickness (likelihood ratio test, P = 0.79) in multivariate analysis. Cataract surgery was performed in 63 phakic eyes (39.9%) during the study period with a mean delay of 8.1 months (CI95% [6.59-9.69]). The mean change in best-corrected visual acuity between phakic eyes who underwent cataract surgery and those who did not, was not significantly different during the follow-up at each visit. The risk of ocular hypertension was not statistically different between phakic and pseudophakic subsets ( P = 0.9).

CONCLUSION

The authors showed here that phakic eyes treated with DEX-implant for diabetic macular edema did not have a significant difference in visual gain in comparison to pseudophakic eyes, with a comparable safety profile.

Intra-Ocular Pressure Response to Dexamethasone Implant Injections in Patients with a History of Filtering Surgery: The TRABEX Study

Patients with both macular edemas, of various etiologies such as diabetes and glaucoma, may suffer serious loss of vision if either disease goes untreated. Where no effective alternative therapies are available, dexamethasone implant (DEX-I) injections may be the only choice of treatment, despite the risk of a possible increase in intraocular pressure (IOP) when using steroids. Although many studies have reported on IOP evolution in eyes treated with DEX-I, little is known specifically about eyes with a history of filtering surgery. The aim of this observational series was to evaluate the IOP response following DEX-I injection in eyes presenting conventional filtering surgeries or microinvasive glaucoma surgeries (MIGS). Twenty-five eyes were included in this study. A total of 64% of the eyes did not experience OHT during follow-up. Additional IOP-lowering therapy was needed for 32% of eyes, and 20% of eyes (all showing bleb fibrosis) required further filtering surgery: 50% of eyes in the MIGS group and 10.5% of eyes in the conventional filtering surgery group. A significant positive correlation was found between IOP at baseline and the maximum IOP throughout follow-ups after DEX-I (r = 0.45, p = 0.02). In conclusion, if DEX-I is used when there are no alternative therapies for treating macular edema, IOP in eyes with a history of filtering surgery is generally manageable. Those eyes which previously underwent conventional therapy with effective blebs obtained better IOP control after DEX-I injections and mostly did not require any additional IOP-lowering therapy or surgery.

Use of selective laser trabeculoplasty as an alternative in patients who developed ocular hypertension after intravitreal dexamethasone implants: a series of 35 eyes

PURPOSE

Steroid-induced ocular hypertension (OHT) occurs in about a third of cases after dexamethasone implant (DEXi) intravitreal injection (IVI), for which treatment discontinuation may be required. The aim of this study was to assess the benefit of selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) in patients who developed transient OHT after DEXi injection to prevent subsequent steroid-induced OHT peaks during reinjections.

METHODS

A real-life, retrospective, and observational study was conducted to assess the intraocular pressure (IOP) after SLT in steroid responders after DEXi injection (IOP > 21 mmHg). Were analyzed: IOP 1 and 2 months after SLT, maximum IOP (IOP_max) after each new DEXi IVI, and the number of prophylactic hypotensive treatments needed at the time of DEXi reinjections.

RESULTS

Thirty-five eyes of 29 patients were included. The mean macular edema follow-up duration was 38.4 ± 28.4 months. SLT was performed after a mean number of 6.3 ± 4.7 DEXi IVIs. After SLT, the IOP_max measured after the first reinjection was lowered by 36.6 ± 14.7% (p < 0.0001). The mean number of hypotensive treatments was 2.1 ± 0.9 before versus 1.5 ± 0.8 after SLT. The post-reinjection lowering in OHT peak was maintained during the subsequent 3 DEXi IVIs: - 29.1 ± 25.5% (p = 0.0009), - 35.8 ± 13.1% (p = 0.0078), and - 45.4 ± 8.6% (p = 0.0312) after the second, third, and fourth DEXi reinjections. SLT allowed continuing injections in 88.6% of patients.

CONCLUSION

The use of 180° SLT in this indication could be an effective therapeutic alternative to control steroid-induced OHT and safely continue DEXi injections.

Efficacy and Safety of Intravitreal Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant for Chronic Diabetic Macular Edema Previously Treated in Real-Life Practice: The REALFAc Study

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is the main cause of visual impairment in diabetic patients and a chronic disease requiring long-term treatments. The fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implant has recently been approved to treat DME in patients considered insufficiently responsive to available therapies. This study evaluates the functional and anatomical efficacy of the FAc implant in real-life practice. A total of 62 eyes with chronic DME were included and followed for a mean of 13.9 (+7.5) months. Previous treatment included at least anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in 83.9% of eyes, dexamethasone implant (DEX-I) in 100% of eyes, vitrectomy in 29.0% of eyes, and laser photocoagulation (either panretinal or focal photocoagulation) in 75.8% of eyes. The mean baseline best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was 64.0 (+/−17.2) letters (median: 67.5 letters) with a mean DME duration of 60.3 (+/−30.6) months. The maximum BCVA gain occurred at 21 months with a mean gain of 5.0 (+/−12.7) letters. A total of 50.0% of eyes gained ≥5 letters during follow-up. Patients with lower BCVA at baseline had the lowest final BCVA (p < 0.001) but the highest BCVA gain (p = 0.02). The best overall improvement in mean central macular thickness (CMT) occurred at 18 months (p < 0.0001). The improvement in BCVA was inversely associated with the decrease in CMT and showed a decrease when CMT increased (DME recurrence). According to the history of vitrectomy, we did not find any significant difference in mean final BCVA (p = 0.1) and mean BCVA gain (p = 0.2) between eyes previously vitrectomized or not. A total of 23 eyes (37.1%) required additional treatment for DME, and 17.7% required an IOP-lowering procedure during follow-up. In conclusion, this real-life observational study demonstrated the efficacy and safety of the FAc implant in patients with chronic DME already treated with other available therapies.

Fluocinolone acetonide implant in diabetic macular edema: International experts' panel consensus guidelines and treatment algorithm

Center-involving diabetic macular edema (DME) is a leading cause of vision impairment in working-age adults. While its management is particularly challenging in a poorly compliant population, continuous innovation and the advent of new molecules have improved its outcome. The control of glycemia and of systemic aggravating factors remain essential to slow down progression of disease complications including DME. The indications for macular laser photocoagulation has progressively been phased out as a standard of care and replaced by local intraocular anti-VEGFs biologics and glucocorticoids (GCs). Intravitreal GCs in controlled-release drug delivery systems have allowed to reduce injection frequency and treatment burden. The non biodegradable Fluocinolone Acetonide (FAc) implant allows a long-lasting stabilization of both functional and anatomic improvements. However, adequate patient selection and monitoring through regular follow-up are essential for optimal results. Based on their experience and the latest literature, the aim of the present review is to provide international expert panel consensus on the place of the FAc implant in the treatment algorithm of DME, as well as its safety profile and how to manage it.

Intravitreal Corticosteroid Implantation in Diabetic Macular Edema: Updated European Consensus Guidance on Monitoring and Managing Intraocular Pressure

Intravitreal therapy for diabetic macular edema can, in susceptible patients, increase intraocular pressure (IOP). As uncontrolled IOP can potentially be sight threatening, monitoring is an essential component of patient management. It can be challenging for retina specialists to ensure that monitoring is rigorous enough to detect and resolve any potential problems at the earliest opportunity without it also being overburdensome for patients who have the lowest risk of developing an IOP rise. We have developed dynamic algorithms that: (1) tailor the frequency and extent of monitoring according to individual susceptibility and current IOP and (2) assist retina specialists in deciding when they should consider a referral to a glaucoma specialist. One algorithm is for patients with a relatively low susceptibility to developing an IOP rise (those whose baseline IOP is < 22 mmHg and who do not have a history of IOP events). Depending on their first post-implantation IOP check, the algorithm classifies them as: low risk if IOP remains < 22 mmHg; medium risk if IOP is 22-25 mmHg and any rise from baseline is < 10 mmHg; or high risk if IOP is > 25 mmHg or any rise from baseline is ≥ 10 mmHg. Thereafter, the algorithm guides on the frequency and extent of monitoring required in each of these groups and, if IOP rises or falls during treatment, patients may move up or down the risk groups accordingly. A different algorithm is provided for patients who are more susceptible to developing an IOP rise (those with a baseline IOP of ≥ 22 mmHg or a prior history of an IOP event). These patients need monitoring more closely so this algorithm has only medium- or high-risk classifications. These algorithms update the previous monitoring guidance by Goñi et al. (Goñi et al. in Ophthalmol Ther 5:47-61, 2016).

LONG-TERM INCIDENCE AND RISK FACTORS OF OCULAR HYPERTENSION FOLLOWING DEXAMETHASONE-IMPLANT INJECTIONS: THE SAFODEX-2 STUDY

PURPOSE

To analyze the incidence, risk factors, and time to onset of ocular hypertension (OHT) after intravitreal injections (IVI) of dexamethasone implant and to evaluate the long-term cumulative probability of intraocular pressure elevation.

METHODS

Eyes of patients having received at least one dexamethasone implant IVI between October 2010 and February 2015 were included in the present study. Ocular hypertension was defined as intraocular pressure > 25 mmHg and/or an increase of 10 mmHg over the follow-up period compared with baseline intraocular pressure.

RESULTS

Four hundred ninety-four eyes were studied in 410 patients. For a total of 1,371 IVI, the incidence of OHT was 32.6% in the study eyes with a mean follow-up period of 30 months (3-62.5) and a median follow-up of 29 months. Pressure-lowering treatment was introduced for 36.9% of eyes. Topical treatment alone was sufficient to manage OHT in 97%. Young age, male sex, uveitis and retinal vein occlusion, and glaucoma treated with a double- or triple-combination topical pressure-lowering medication were found to be risk factors for OHT. The incidence of OHT did not change with an increase in the number of IVI, and there was no cumulative effect, defining by an increase of the incidence of OHT in patients after repeated IVI (P = 0.248).

CONCLUSION

This study confirmed that OHT is of moderate incidence, transient, controlled by topical treatment and provides data on the long-term cumulative probability of intraocular pressure elevation in a large cohort of eyes treated with dexamethasone implant IVI. Repeat injections of dexamethasone implant neither increase nor decrease the risk of OHT.

Long-term follow-up of diabetic macular edema treated with dexamethasone implant: a real-life study

AIMS

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravitreal dexamethasone implant (DEX-implant) for diabetic macular edema (DME) in real-life practice with an extended follow-up for up to 5 year.

METHODS

This multicentric retrospective study reviewed 227 eyes of 152 patients with DME treated by DEX-implant. Main outcome measures included changes in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), time to retreatment and incidence of adverse effects.

RESULTS

The mean number of DEX-implant received by patients was 2.6 (± 2.2) with a mean (SD) follow-up of 20.1 (± 15.8) months, median [IQR] 15.8 [7.4-30.1]. The mean time of retreatment was 6.9 months. The mean maximal BCVA gain during follow-up was 12.3 (± 12.7) letters. A gain of ≥ 5, ≥ 10 and ≥ 15 letters from baseline BCVA was obtained for 71.8%, 48.9% and 34.8% of eyes, respectively. A total of 62.6% of eyes presented a significant anatomical response (decrease of CMT ≥ 20%), and DME was resolved (absence of cystoid macular spaces on OCT) in 37% of cases at the end of the follow-up. A transient increase in intraocular pressure ≥ 25 mmHg occurred in 14.1% of eyes, and cataract surgery was performed for 49.1% of the phakic eyes during the follow-up. Four eyes developed a proliferative diabetic retinopathy.

CONCLUSION

This large cohort study showed favorable long-term outcomes when using DEX-implant, which provides substantial long-term benefits in the treatment of DME in real life.

The Effect of Selective Laser Trabeculoplasty on Intraocular Pressure in Patients with Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant-Induced Elevated Intraocular Pressure

Introduction

To assess the safety and efficacy of selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) for ocular hypertension (OHT) induced by a dexamethasone (DEX) intravitreal implant.

Materials and Methods

We performed a retrospective study of patients who underwent an SLT procedure for ocular hypertension induced by injection of a DEX intravitreal implant. Patients had, at least, one injection of the DEX-implant for symptomatic macular edema. SLT was delivered to 360° of the trabecular meshwork in two sessions. The primary outcome was a decrease in IOP, evaluated at one, three, and six months after the SLT procedure.

Results

Twenty-six eyes of 22 patients were included. The mean intraocular pressure (IOP) measured after DEX-implant injection was 25.4 ± 5.4 mmHg, and the mean increase in IOP was 35.8 ± 14.6%. The mean follow-up after SLT was 18.3 ± 7.7 months. After SLT, the mean IOP dropped by 30.9% at one month (16.9 ± 4.5 mmHg, p=0.01), 33.6% at three months (16.0 ± 2.7 mmHg, p < 0.01), and 34.9% at six months (15.6 ± 2.1 mmHg, p < 0.01). Each patient had a minimum follow-up of 6 months after SLT. Eight eyes (31%) received a second DEX-implant injection after the SLT procedure without experiencing an increase in the IOP above 21 mmHg or >20%. No glaucoma surgery was required during the follow-up. The mean number of medications (1.65 ± 1.36) was significantly reduced at one (1.19 ± 1.20, p=0.04), three (0.96 ± 1.03, p < 0.01), and six months (0.77 ± 0.95, p < 0.01) after SLT.

Conclusion

SLT is an effective and safe procedure to control OHT following DEX-implant intravitreal injection.

[Dexamethasone intravitreal implant (Ozurdex) in patients with diabetic macular edema: Real life safety and efficacy]

PURPOSE

The goal of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of the intravitreal dexamethasone implant (DI) for patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) in real life.

METHODS

We conducted a monocentric retrospective analysis of the change in visual acuity and central macular thickness (CMT) after intravitreal injection of the DI at peak efficacy (2 months after injection) as well as the timing of reinjections and complications in patients with a loss of vision due to DME.

RESULTS

Forty eyes of 33 patients were included, with a mean follow-up of 12.6 months. Thirty percent of the eyes experienced an increase in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA)>15 letters at peak efficacy (P<0.05) after each ID injection. Treatment-naive patients had a sustained response after Ozurdex injection, with better visual acuity at 3 months (P=0.02) and 4 months (P=0.04) than non-naïve patients and better visual acuity at 6 months despite identical baseline visual acuity (P<0.05). Anatomical efficacy was good, with approximately 60% of patients with CMT<300 microns at peak efficacy after each injection of ID. Thirty percent of eyes demonstrated ocular hypertension (OHT)>25mmHg at peak efficacy, and 12.5% of eyes required cataract surgery during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The DI has good functional and anatomic efficacy in these patients, with a good safety profile. Treatment-naïve patients with more recent DME had a more sustained increase in visual acuity after the injections and better visual recovery at 6 months. This encourages us to initiate DI therapy early if there is no response to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) treatment.

[Late and sustained intraocular pressure elevation related to intravitreal anti-VEGF injections: Cases requiring filtering surgery (French translation of the article)]

We report cases of delayed, sustained elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) associated with repeated intravitreal anti-VEGF injections (IVI), which ultimately resulted in the need for filtering surgery. Two of the three cases demonstrated severe IOP elevation despite maximal medical treatment following unilateral IVI and required urgent filtering surgery. Optic nerve involvement was severe in all three cases. These intravitreal injections were performed for exudative age-related macular degeneration (AMD), and the patients did not show any sign of glaucoma or ocular hypertension prior to the initiation of treatment. Elevated IOP secondary to intravitreal steroids is a well-known side effect, as is immediate transient IOP elevation associated with anti-VEGF injection. Late, sustained IOP elevation after repeated injections of anti-VEGF, described approximately ten years ago, is often underestimated. Its incidence is estimated between 2.1% and 13% according to studies and increases with the number of IVI (cumulative effect). The pathophysiologic process is becoming increasingly understood, and several risk factors for this chronic IOP elevation have been identified. Most often, it is a moderate IOP elevation for which topical monotherapy is sufficient, or sometimes two, three or four medications or even selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT). However, filtering surgery may rarely be required. Our findings illustrate a little-described phenomenon: a sudden, severe, late IOP elevation in response to anti-VEGF by an "overflow" effect, requiring urgent filtering surgery.

Late and sustained intraocular pressure elevation related to intravitreal anti-VEGF injections: Cases requiring filtering surgery

We report cases of delayed, sustained elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) associated with repeated intravitreal anti-VEGF injections (IVI), which ultimately resulted in the need for filtering surgery. Two of the three cases demonstrated severe IOP elevation despite maximal medical treatment following unilateral IVI and required urgent filtering surgery. Optic nerve involvement was severe in all three cases. These intravitreal injections were performed for exudative age-related macular degeneration (AMD), and the patients did not show any sign of glaucoma or ocular hypertension prior to the initiation of treatment. Elevated IOP secondary to intravitreal steroids is a well-known side effect, as is immediate transient IOP elevation associated with anti-VEGF injection. Late, sustained IOP elevation after repeated injections of anti-VEGF, described approximately ten years ago, is often underestimated. Its incidence is estimated between 2.1 % and 13 % according to studies and increases with the number of IVI (cumulative effect). The pathophysiologic process is becoming increasingly understood, and several risk factors for this chronic IOP elevation have been identified. Most often, it is a moderate IOP elevation for which topical monotherapy is sufficient, or sometimes two, three or four medications or even selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT). However, filtering surgery may rarely be required. Our findings illustrate a little-described phenomenon: a sudden, severe, late IOP elevation in response to anti-VEGF by an "overflow" effect, requiring urgent filtering surgery.