Treatment of Macular Edema after Pars Plana Vitrectomy for Idiopathic Epiretinal Membrane Using Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant: Long-Term Outcomes

Anatomical and functional changes after internal limiting membrane peeling

Internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling has been an acceptable step in vitrectomy surgeries for various retinal diseases such as macular hole, chronic macular edema following epiretinal membrane (ERM), and vitreoretinal traction. Despite all the benefits, this procedure has some side effects, which may lead to structural damage and functional vision loss. Light and dye toxicity may induce reversible and irreversible retina damage, which will be observed in postoperative optical coherence tomography scans. Retinal nerve fiber layer damage is attributed to ganglion cell degeneration and axonal transport alteration and dissociated optic nerve fiber layer is due to Müller cell damage. Eccentric MHs and recurrence of previous MHs may also lead to vision loss. Iatrogenic retinal damage may cause structural retinal changes without significant vision loss or progression to choroidal neovascularization. The mechanism of persistent macular edema after membrane peeling is still unclear, but it has been related to tractional trauma and blood-retina barrier damage. The reappearance of ERM is another cause of decreased vision after ILM peeling, which might be secondary to incomplete membrane removal. In glaucoma patients, ILM peeling is associated with significantly worsening the mean deviation on the visual field test after the surgery. We discussed various causes of vision loss and structural changes following ILM peeling. These causes may be attributed to the surgical procedure itself or the associated steps, instruments, and dyes used during the ILM peeling procedure.

Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant in Vitreoretinal Surgery: An Overview of the Literature

BACKGROUND

The sustained-release intravitreal 0.7 mg dexamethasone implant (DEX implant) (Ozurdex®, Allergan®, an AbbVie Company, North Chicago, Illinois, USA) is widely used to treat various inflammatory retinal disorders. Notably, its application is expanding in the field of vitreoretinal surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive literature search across the Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE, and ScienceDirect databases for articles related to Ozurdex and its applications in vitreoretinal disorders. Additionally, relevant studies were identified from the reference lists of retrieved articles. Our search was limited to studies written in English or those in other languages that provided an English abstract with sufficient information.

RESULTS

Multiple studies have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of the DEX implant across a broad spectrum of vitreoretinal and post-surgical conditions. Notably, the implant's unique pharmacokinetics remain largely unaffected by the vitrectomized status of the eye, ensuring consistent effectiveness in vitreoretinal surgery. Our research highlights the primary off-label applications of the DEX implant, which include epiretinal membrane (ERM), rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD), post-surgical cystoid macular edema (PSCME), and refractory diabetic macular edema (DME).

CONCLUSION

This review highlights the increasing role of the DEX implant in vitreoretinal surgery, emphasizing its effectiveness and safety in various surgical and post-surgical settings, while also addressing associated complications.

Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Preoperative Intravitreal Triamcinolone Acetonide Combined with Internal Limiting Membrane Peeling for the Treatment of Idiopathic Macular Epiretinal Membrane

PURPOSE

To assess the efficacy and safety of preoperative intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) combined with internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling for idiopathic epiretinal membrane (IMEM).

METHODS

This was a retrospective study. Thirty-six phakic eyes of 35 patients were included in this study. IVTA was administered to 18 patients (18 eyes, Group IVTA) 7 days before vitrectomy, while the other 17 patients (18 eyes, Group no-IVTA) only underwent vitrectomy and ILM peeling. Patients were followed up for at least 6 months. Data on best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), central macular thickness (CMT), inner retinal thickness (IRT), vascular parameters (measured by optical coherence tomography angiography, OCTA), mean macular sensitivity (MMS), 63% bivariate contour ellipse area (BCEA) and P1 (measured by macular integrity assessment, MAIA) were collected.

RESULTS

There were significant differences in BCVA and IRT between the IVTA group and the no-IVTA group at 6 months after surgery (p = .000 and p = .010). The CMT and MMS of the two groups significantly changed from the preoperative values; however, there were no differences between the 2 groups during the entire study period (p = .242 and p = .849). The changes in vascular parameters, including foveal avascular zone (FAZ) area and vessel densities of superficial and deep capillary plexus (SCP VD and DCP VD), in the two groups were not statistically significant. There were no statistically significant differences in 63% BCEA and P1 either.

CONCLUSION

Macular morphology and macular integrity improved after vitrectomy combined with ILM peeling surgery. Compared with the no-IVTA group, preoperative intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide can improve best corrected visual acuity and accelerate the absorption of intraretinal fluid in terms of a significant reduction in IRT.

Twelve-Month Outcomes and Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) Biomarkers After Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implantation in Pseudophakic Eyes with Post-Vitrectomy Cystoid Macular Edema (CME)-Refractory to Medical Therapy

Background: In this study, we evaluated the incidence of cystoid macular edema (CME) after pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for different retinal pathologies and assessed the role of optical coherence tomography (OCT) biomarkers in guiding treatment decisions in post-surgical CME patients who were refractory to medical therapy over a follow-up period of 12 months. Methods: Medical records of consecutive pseudophakic patients, who underwent PPV for different retinal pathologies, were retrospectively evaluated in this single-center, uncontrolled study. The incidence of post-PPV CME was assessed. Eyes with post-PPV CME in the first 2 months after surgery, with available clinical and OCT data for 12 months after surgery, were included in the evaluation. The mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA; logMAR), mean central macular thickness (CMT; μm) change, and response to different treatments [medical therapy and intravitreal dexamethasone (DEX) implant] were evaluated 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after PPV. The impact of OCT biomarkers on the exposure to DEX implants was assessed. Adverse events, potentially related to the treatment, were investigated as well. Results: Of the 346 pseudophakic patients (352 eyes) who participated in this study, 54 (54 eyes) developed CME within the first 2 months after PPV (incidence of 15.3%). Among them, 48 patients were deemed eligible for the 12-month analysis. Preoperative mean BCVA (1.44 ± 0.99 logMAR) significantly improved to 0.32 ± 0.37 logMAR after 12 months (p < 0.001). The mean baseline CMT of 347 (±123.5) μm significantly decreased to 290 μm (±80.4; p = 0.003) by the end of the follow-up. Twenty-five eyes (52%) required one or more DEX implants for CME, due to being refractory to topical therapy. Significant correlations were found between the mean CMT values at various time points. Additionally, patients who required DEX implants at months 3 and 9 were more likely to present intraretinal fluid (IRF), disorganization of inner retinal layers (DRIL), disorganization of outer retinal layers (DROL), and hyper-reflective foci (HRF) at 1-month OCT. Five patients experienced a slight increase in intraocular pressure (IOP), which was successfully managed with topical medication. Conclusions: Topical therapy alone can be a valuable option for post-PPV CME in approximately 50% of patients. Significant visual recovery and macular thickness reduction at 12 months demonstrated that DEX implants can be a safe and effective second-line treatment for pseudophakic patients with post-PPV CME and who are refractory to medical therapy. Early post-surgical OCT biomarkers may indicate a more severe CME that might benefit from the steroid implant.

Use of a dexamethasone implant to treat macular edema following pars plana vitrectomy and removal of the primary epiretinal membrane

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of an intravitreal dexamethasone (DEX) implant for the treatment of macular edema (ME) following pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) and removal of the primary epiretinal membrane (ERM) and to assess the impact of the integrity of the ellipsoid zone (EZ) and disorganization of the retinal inner layer (DRIL) grade on visual and anatomical outcomes.

METHODS

Forty-two pseudophakic patients who developed ME following PPV and removal of the primary stage 2-3 ERM were included. Patients were divided into two groups when ME was diagnosed via spectral domain optic coherence tomography (SD-OCT). In the DEX group (n = 22), DEX was implanted for the treatment of ME. In the control group (n = 20), only observation was conducted, without any treatment. The best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and macular thickness (MT) of the two groups were compared at baseline and 1, 6, and 12 months after DEX implantation. The effects of OCT parameters such as EZ integrity and DRIL grade were also evaluated in terms of decreases in MT and increases in VA in the treatment of ME with DEX implantation. Intraocular pressure (IOP), number of DEX implantations and adverse effects were also recorded.

RESULTS

While a statistically significant increase in the mean BCVA was observed in the DEX group (p < 0.001 at months 1, 6, and 12, respectively), no such increase was detected in the control group (p = 0.169, p = 0.065, and p = 0.058 at months 1, 6 and 12, respectively) compared with the baseline. A statistically significant decrease in the mean MT was observed in the DEX group (p  < 0.001 at months 1, 6, and 12); however, no significant difference was observed in the control group (p  = 0.081, p  = 0.065, and p  = 0.054 at months 1, 6 and 12, respectively) compared with the baseline. Significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of the increase in BCVA (p  < 0.01) and decrease in MT (p  < 0.01) at all visits, with the outcomes being more favorable in the DEX group. A statistically significant relationship was found between the increase in VA and EZ integrity and DRIL grade in both groups. Ten patients (45.4%) received two injections of DEX during the follow-up. An increase in IOP was observed in five patients (22.7%) who were treated with topical antiglaucomatous drops. No significant side effects were observed.

CONCLUSION

DEX implantation was found to be effective and safe for the treatment of ME following PPV and primary ERM removal, although some eyes may require repeated injections to achieve visual and anatomical success. Additionally, a relationship was found between EZ integrity, DRIL grade and visual-anatomical outcomes.

Current management options for the treatment of refractory postoperative cystoid macular edema: A systematic review

Post-operative cystoid macular edema (PCME) is an important complication following intraocular surgery that often resolves spontaneously without treatment. In some cases, PCME may persist despite initial medical therapy, which can adversely impact visual outcomes. Various topical, intraocular and systemic treatments exist for the prevention and management of cystoid macular edema; however, there is no consensus on treatment of refractory cases in the postoperative setting. In accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, we systematically reviewed 68 articles describing management options and their outcomes for treatment-resistant cases of PCME. The most commonly reported treatments included steroid (39 studies) and biological-based (17 studies) therapies. We provide an overview of the treatment options for refractory PCME.

Optical coherence tomography biomarkers as outcome predictors to guide dexamethasone implant use in patients with iERM: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

We aimed to investigate the anatomical features of optical coherence tomography (OCT) and vitreous cytokine levels as predictors of outcomes of combined phacovitrectomy with intravitreal dexamethasone (DEX) implants for idiopathic epiretinal membrane (iERM) treatment.

METHODS

A prospective, single-masked, randomized, controlled clinical trial included 48 eyes. They were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to undergo the DEX group (combined phacovitrectomy with ERM peeling and Ozurdex implantation) and control group (phacovitrectomy only). Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) were assessed at 1 d, 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months. The structural features of OCT before surgery were analysed for stratified analysis. Baseline soluble CD14 (sCD14) and sCD163 levels in the vitreous fluid were measured using ELISA.

RESULTS

BCVA and CMT were not significantly different in the DEX and control groups. Eyes with hyperreflective foci (HRF) at baseline achieved better BCVA (Ptime*group=0.746; Pgroup=0.043, Wald χ²=7.869) and lower CMT (Ptime*group = 0.079; Pgroup = 0.001, Wald χ²=6.774) responses to DEX during follow-up. In all patients, the mean vitreous level of sCD163 in eyes with HRF was significantly higher than that in eyes without HRF (P = 0.036, Z=-2.093) at baseline. In the DEX group, higher sCD163 predicted greater reduction in CMT from baseline to 1 month (r = 0.470, P = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that intraoperative DEX implantation did not have beneficial effects on BCVA and CMT over a 3-month period in all patients with iERM, implying that the use of DEX for all iERM is not recommended. In contrast, for those with HRF on OCT responded better to DEX implants at the 3-month follow-up and thier vitreous fluid expressed higher levels of sCD163 at baseline. These data support the hypothesis that DEX implants may be particularly effective in treating cases where ERM is secondary to inflammation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trail has been registered at Chinese Clinical Trail Registry( https://www.chictr.org.cn ) on 2021/03/12 (ChiCTR2100044228). And all patients in the article were enrolled after registration.

Changes in optical coherence tomography biomarkers in eyes with advanced idiopathic epiretinal membrane treated with dexamethasone implantation

PURPOSE

To investigate the effects of vitrectomy and intravitreal dexamethasone (DEX) implantation on retinal biomarkers in patients with advanced idiopathic epiretinal membrane (IERM) and to evaluate this treatment's anatomical and functional outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 41 patients with advanced IERM who underwent vitrectomy and were divided into a pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) group (20 eyes) and a dexamethasone (DEX) group (21 eyes) based on intravitreal DEX implantation. We collected data on best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), disorganization of the retinal inner layers (DRIL), subretinal fluid, intraretinal cystoid changes (IRC), integrity of the inner-outer segment layer, and intraocular pressure.

RESULTS

BCVA improved significantly in both groups; the DEX group had a higher visual acuity gain at 1 and 6 months (P = 0.002 and 0.023, respectively). Postoperative CMT gradually decreased in both groups, with the DEX group showing a greater decrease at 1 and 6 months (P = 0.009 and 0.033, respectively). Six months after surgery, the DRIL and IRC grades in the DEX group were significantly improved compared to those in the PPV group (P = 0.037 and 0.038, respectively). Multivariate regression analyses revealed that patients with intraoperative DEX implants were more likely to have a significant CMT reduction (≥ 100 μm) from baseline (odds ratio (OR), 9.44; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 1.58-56.56; P = 0.014) at 6 months and less likely to exhibit DRIL at 6 months postoperatively (OR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.01-0.68; P = 0.021).

CONCLUSION

Vitrectomy combined with intravitreal DEX implantation facilitates the recovery of postoperative visual acuity and improvement of anatomical outcomes in patients with advanced IERM, effectively reducing CMT and improving DRIL.

A Comparison of Ocular Complications after 0.7 mg Dexamethasone Implant versus 2 mg of Intravitreal Triamcinolone in Vitrectomized Eyes

OBJECTIVE

To compare the rates of complications in eyes that received a dexamethasone (DEX) implant (0.7 mg) or intravitreal triamcinolone (IVT) (2 mg) to treat postvitrectomy macular edema (ME).

DESIGN

Retrospective, comparative, case series.

SUBJECTS

A total of 148 eyes (147 patients); 75 eyes (75 patients) in the DEX group and 73 eyes (72 patients) in the IVT group.

METHODS

The medical records of patients who received an intravitreal DEX 0.7 mg (Ozurdex) or triamcinolone (2 mg) (Triesence) for postvitrectomy ME between July 2014 and December 2021 with a minimum follow-up of 3 months were reviewed. Ocular hypotony and ocular hypertension were defined as intraocular pressure of < 6 mmHg and > 24 mmHg, respectively.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The rates of complications.

RESULTS

The follow-up duration was 2.5 ± 1.6 years, with no significant difference between the groups (P = 0.398). The rate of transient ocular hypotony per eye and per injection was significantly higher in the DEX group (10 eyes [13%], 30 of 443 injections [7%]) compared with the IVT group (2 eyes [3%], 2 of 262 injections [0.8%]) (P = 0.039 and < 0.001, respectively). Mean visual acuity significantly decreased at the time of ocular hypotony (P = 0.031), but returned to preinjection level after resolution of the hypotony after a median of 12 days. The incidence of ocular hypertension was higher in the DEX group (23 eyes [31%]) than the IVT group (16 eyes [22%]), but this was not statistically significant (P = 0.307). Ocular hypertension was controlled with observation or topical medication. There were no between-group differences in the incidence of vitreous hemorrhage (DEX, 3 eyes [4%]; IVT, 1 eye [1%]; P = 0.632) or rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (DEX, 3 eyes [4%]; IVT, 0 eyes [0%]; P = 0.253). Four eyes (5%) experienced migration of the DEX implant into the anterior chamber. No eye developed endophthalmitis.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of ocular hypotony, which causes transient visual impairment, was significantly higher in vitrectomized eyes treated with DEX compared with eyes treated with IVT. Injections other than the inferotemporal quadrant or rotating injection sites may be recommended.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Efficacy of Combined Vitrectomy with Intravitreal Corticosteroid Injection for Idiopathic Epiretinal Membrane Removal on Anatomical and Functional Outcomes: A Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Macular edema can be a cause of visual loss in eyes undergoing vitrectomy with epiretinal membrane(ERM) peeling.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of combined vitrectomy with intravitreal corticosteroid injection for ERM.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review by searching PubMed, Embase, and Medline up to December 2020 for studies that evaluated the effect of intravitreal corticosteroid injection during vitrectomy for ERM. Follow-up data on postoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) were collected and pooled using the standard mean deviation (SMD) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was statistically quantified using I2 statistics, and a meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Eight studies provided data on a total sample of 443 eyes. The meta-analysis revealed that concomitant intravitreal corticosteroid administration during vitrectomy contributed to a significant reduction in CMT than vitrectomy alone at 3 months after operation (pooled SMD = -0.353; 95% CI, -0.594 to -0.111; p = 0.004). However, between the two groups, no significant difference was found in CMT reduction at 1 and 6 months after operation and in postoperative BCVA improvement at 1, 3, and 6 months after operation.

CONCLUSION

Combined treatment with vitrectomy and intravitreal corticosteroid injection may accelerate CMT reduction 3 months after ERM surgery. However, it did not result in a significant change in CMT and BCVA compared with vitrectomy alone at the end of follow-up.

Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant for Postoperative Macular Oedema Secondary to Vitrectomy for Epiretinal Membrane and Retinal Detachment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of intravitreal dexamethasone implant (DEX) for the treatment of macular oedema secondary to vitrectomy for epiretinal membrane (ERM) and retinal detachment (RD) by conducting a systematic review with meta-analysis of published studies.

METHODS

Studies reporting clinical outcomes of DEX use for the treatment of macular oedema secondary to ERM and RD vitrectomy were searched on PubMed and Embase databases. The primary outcome was best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) change between baseline and post-DEX treatment, reported as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Mean central macular thickness (CMT) change was assessed as a secondary outcome. Postimplant adverse events, including intraocular pressure rise and cataract development, were reported as well.

RESULTS

Five uncontrolled studies, 1 nonrandomized controlled study, and 1 randomized controlled study were included, with a total of 5 cohorts and 3 cohorts in the ERM group and RD group, respectively. Considering the last available follow-up, a significant improvement in postimplant BCVA was found in the overall population, irrespective of the indication for vitrectomy (MD = -0.28, 95% CI = -0.37, -0.20; p < 0.001), but with significant heterogeneity. In either group, mean BCVA significantly improved following the implant (in the ERM group, MD = -0.31, 95% CI = -0.40, -0.22; in the RD group, MD = -0.22, 95% CI = -0.41, -0.03), with no difference between the two groups (p=0.41). However, there was significant heterogeneity in both groups. Considering the last available follow-up, a significant CMT reduction was found in the overall population, irrespective of the indication for vitrectomy (MD = -129.75, 95% CI = -157.49, -102.01; p < 0.001). In the ERM group, a significant CMT reduction was shown following DEX (MD = -133.41, 95% CI = -155.37, -111.45; p < 0.001), with no heterogeneity. In the RD group, mean CMT reduction was borderline significant (MD = -128.37, 95% CI = -253.57, -3.18; p=0.040), with significant heterogeneity. No difference in CMT improvement was found between the two groups (p=0.94).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis showed that DEX yielded a significant improvement in visual and anatomical outcomes, even if limited by significant heterogeneity. Dexamethasone implant represents an effective treatment for postoperative macular oedema secondary to ERM and RD vitrectomy.

Epiretinal Membrane Vitrectomy With and Without Intraoperative Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of vitrectomy combined with intravitreal dexamethasone implant vs. vitrectomy without the implant in patients with epiretinal membrane (ERM) by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods: Studies that compared ERM vitrectomy with and without intraoperative dexamethasone implant with a follow-up ≥3 months were included. The primary outcome was mean best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) change between eyes undergoing ERM vitrectomy combined with dexamethasone implant (DEX group) and eyes undergoing ERM vitrectomy alone (control group) at 3 months. Secondary outcomes included mean BCVA change at 6 months and mean optical coherence tomography central macular thickness (CMT) change at both 3-months and 6-months follow-up. Mean differences (MDs) with their 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were calculated. Meta-analyses were based either on random effect model or fixed effect model according to heterogeneity.

Results: Four studies were included. At 3 months, ERM vitrectomy combined with dexamethasone implant yielded a greater visual gain compared to vitrectomy alone (MD = 9.7; 95%CI = 2.6–16.8; p = 0.01). However, significant heterogeneity was found. A sensitivity analysis excluding the only retrospective non-randomized study confirmed a greater visual gain in the DEX group (MD = 7.1; 95%CI = 2.7–11.6; p < 0.01), with no heterogeneity. At 6 months, a non-significant but borderline difference in visual gain was shown between in the two groups (MD = 5.1; 95%CI = −0.3–10.5; p = 0.06), with no heterogeneity. Three-month analysis of CMT revealed a greater reduction in the DEX group (MD = −80.2; 95%CI =−149.1–11.2; p = 0.02), but with significant heterogeneity. A sensitivity analysis excluding the only retrospective non-randomized study allowed to reduce heterogeneity, but no difference in 3-months CMT change was found between the two groups (MD = −50.0; 95%CI = −106.2–6.2; p = 0.08). At 6 months, no difference in CMT change was shown between the two groups (MD = −48.5; 95%CI = −120.5–23.5; p = 0.19), with significant heterogeneity.

Conclusions: Intraoperative dexamethasone implant in eyes undergoing vitrectomy for ERM provided a better visual outcome at 3 months compared to ERM vitrectomy without the implant, with limited evidence of better anatomic outcome as well. Further studies are needed to ascertain whether dexamethasone implant would ensure a significant long-term visual benefit as a result of a faster reduction of macular thickening.

The outcome of fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant is predicted by the response to dexamethasone implant in diabetic macular oedema

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

To investigate if the visual and anatomic response to the first dexamethasone implant (DEX) predicts the 12-month clinical outcome after shifting to fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implant in patients with diabetic macular oedema (DMO).

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study including pseudophakic patients with previously treated DMO, undergone one or more DEX injections before FAc. Functional and morphologic response to DEX was defined based on the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) changes after the first DEX, respectively. Steroid-response was defined as intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation ≥5 mmHg or IOP > 21 mmHg after any previous DEX exposure. Pairwise comparisons for BCVA, CMT, and IOP after FAc were performed with linear mixed models and a repeated-measure design.

RESULTS

Forty-four eyes of 33 patients were included. Patients were shifted to FAc after a mean ± standard deviation of 4.6 ± 3.2 DEX injections. Overall, BCVA and CMT improved during the first 12 months after switching to FAc (p = 0.04 and p < 0.001, respectively). Only eyes with a good morphologic response to DEX had a significant CMT reduction after FAc (p < 0.001), while no significant relationship was found between BCVA improvement after DEX and after FAc. IOP elevation occurred in 9 eyes (20%) following DEX implant. These eyes carried a 20-fold increased risk of having an IOP rise after FAc (p < 0.001), with a non-linear relationship between the IOP increase after DEX and the one after FAc.

CONCLUSION

The response to previous DEX may anticipate the morphologic response to subsequent FAc. Eyes with steroid-induced IOP elevation after DEX are at a high risk of IOP increase after FAc. The visual response after FAc was not associated with the visual response to previous steroids, indicating that FAc may have a role also in patients refractory to DEX implant.

Evaluation of intraoperative slow-release dexamethasone implant combined with idiopathic epiretinal membrane removal

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of intraoperative slow-release dexamethasone implant (DEX) combined with removal of idiopathic epiretinal membrane (ERM).

METHODS

In this observational retrospective study, data of 40 patients with phakic eyes affected by idiopathic ERM were analysed. All patients underwent cataract phacoemulsification, 25-gauge (G) pars plana vitrectomy (PPV), ERM removal with DEX implant ("DEX YES" group, #20) or without DEX implant ("DEX NO" group, #20). We collected data on best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) < 20/40 Snellen charts, central macular thickness (CMT) ≤ 400 μm (measured by SD-OCT) and integrity of sub-foveal ellipsoid/myoid zone. BCVA, CMT and intraocular pressure (IOP) were evaluated at baseline as well as 15, 30 and 90 days after surgery.

RESULTS

In the "DEX YES" group, statistically significant BCVA improvement was observed at 15, 30 and 90 days (p < 0.001), while in the "DEX NO" group, improvements were observed only at 30 and 90 days (p < 0.001). In both groups, CMT significantly decreased at each follow-up visit (p < 0.001), and no statistically significant increase of IOP was detected at each follow-up visit.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, DEX accelerated the improvement of BCVA at 15 days after surgery. However, no evidence of further anatomical (CMT) and functional (BCVA) DEX effectiveness combined with removal of idiopathic ERM by 25-G PPV at 30 and 90 days follow-up was observed.

The Effects of Epiretinal Membranes on the Treatment Outcomes of Dexamethasone Implants in Diabetic Macular Edema: A Real-Life Study

Purpose: To evaluate the effects of a coexisting epiretinal membrane (ERM) on the treatment outcomes of a dexamethasone implant (DI) in diabetic macular edema (DME) patients. Methods: One hundred five eyes of 78 DME patients (44 F, 34 M; mean age: 65.7) treated with minimum 2 DIs were enrolled into this retrospective study. The study population was divided into the ERM (+) study group and the ERM (-) control group. The best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure, and central macular thicknesses (CMTs) were evaluated at baseline and months 1, 2, and 3 after each DI treatment. Results: Both groups were comparable in baseline BCVA, CMT, HbA1c levels, and age. In the study group (n: 49), BCVA changed following the first DI from 0.83 to 0.76 and from 0.97 to 0.80 following the second DI. CMT decreased after the first DI from 465 to 377 μ (P < 0.001) and from 477 to 356 μ (P < 0.001) after the second DI. In the control group (n: 56), BCVA changed following the first DI from 0.81 to 0.77 and from 0.86 to 0.83 following the second DI. After the first DI, CMT decreased from 483 to 280 μ (P < 0.001) and from 468 to 301 μ (P < 0.001) after the second DI. The inter-group comparison revealed no significant difference in visual or anatomical gain (P = 0.46, P = 0.05, respectively). Conclusion: The presence of an epiretinal membrane did not change the treatment response to DI therapy.

Efficacy and Safety of Combined Vitrectomy with Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant for Advanced Stage Epiretinal Membrane

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of combined 25-gauge (G) pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with intravitreal dexamethasone implant (DXI) for the treatment of advanced stage epiretinal membrane (ERM).

Methods

Forty consecutive pseudophakic eyes with idiopathic stage 3-4 ERM and intraretinal cysts were randomly assigned to two treatment groups. Twenty eyes underwent combined 25-G PPV, ERM peeling and slow-release DXI (DEX group), whereas 20 eyes underwent standard 25-G PPV with ERM peeling only (control group). Differences in postoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), central macular thickness (CMT) were evaluated.

Results

In all patients, BCVA significantly increased at 1, 3 and 6 months after surgery compared to baseline (all p < 0.05), but at 3 and 6 months, the visual gain was higher in the DEX group (respectively, p = 0.036, p = 0.006). CMT was significantly lower in DEX group compared to control group at 3 and 6 months after surgery (respectively, p = 0.042, p = 0.003). There was no statistically significant difference in IOP change over the course of the follow-up between groups (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

Combined 25-G PPV with DXI is associated with better anatomical and functional outcomes in patients with advanced stage ERM.