Treatment of Non-infectious Uveitic Macular Edema with the Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant

Intravitreal immunotherapy in non-infectious uveitis: an update

INTRODUCTION

In the past several years, there have been numerous advances in pharmacotherapeutics for the management of uveitis and other ocular inflammatory diseases, including newer therapeutic agents and ocular drug delivery systems. One of the most attractive modes of drug delivery is the intravitreal route since it has proven to be safe and efficacious and prevents unwanted systemic adverse events related to the agent.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, intravitreal delivery of various pharmacotherapeutic agents for noninfectious uveitis has been described. An extensive review of the literature was performed using specific keywords on the PubMed database to identify clinical studies employing various pharmacotherapeutic agents with intravitreal drug delivery for noninfectious uveitis. The mode of action, safety, efficacy, and tolerability of these drugs have also been elucidated.

EXPERT OPINION

Several agents, including biologic response modifier agents, have been found to be safe and efficacious for various indications of uveitis, such as cystoid macular edema, active uveitis, and other conditions such as retinal vasculitis and vitreous haze. The use of intravitreal biological therapies, especially infliximab, has been fraught with potential safety signals such as photoreceptor toxicity. However, pharmacotherapeutic agents such as corticosteroids and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents are now widely used in the clinical management of uveitis and its complications.

Efficacy and safety of single-dose intravitreal dexamethasone implant in non-infectious uveitic macular edema: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of single-dose intravitreal dexamethasone (DEX) implant for treating non-infectious uveitic macular edema (UME).

Methods

Studies including clinical outcomes of the DEX implant in UME were comprehensively searched in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for potential studies from inception to July 2022. The primary outcomes were best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) during the follow-up period. Stata 12.0 was used to perform the statistical analyses.

Results

Six retrospective studies and one prospective investigation involving 201 eyes were ultimately included. Significantly improved BCVA was observed from baseline to 1 month (WMD = -0.15, 95%CI = -0.24, -0.06), 3 months (WMD = -0.22, 95%CI = -0.29, -0.15), and 6 months (WMD = -0.24, 95%CI = -0.35, -0.13), after single-dose DEX implant. When considering CMT, macular thickness of 1 month (WMD = -179.77, 95%CI = -223.45, -136.09), 3 months (WMD = -179.13, 95%CI = -232.63, -125.63), and 6 months (WMD = -140.25, 95%CI = -227.61, -52.88) decreased in comparison with baseline, with statistical significance.

Conclusion

Based on the current results, this meta-analysis confirmed favorable visual prognosis and anatomical improvement in patients with UME, after receiving the single-dose DEX implant. The most common adverse event is increased intraocular pressure, which could be controlled with topical medications.Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022325969.

Long-term efficacy of dexamethasone intravitreal implant in the treatment of Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada disease relapsing posterior uveitis

Purpose:

To investigate the efficacy and safety of dexamethasone intravitreal implant in the treatment of relapsing posterior uveitis in patients with chronic recurrent Vogt–Koyanagi–Harada (VKH) disease.

Methods:

This was a prospective study of 29 eyes of 16 patients with posterior uveitis in chronic recurrent VKH disease. All patients received previous systemic steroid and immunosuppressive regimens. All patients underwent a comprehensive ophthalmic examination, including best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), Indocyanine green angiography (ICGA), fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA), and spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). All patients underwent intravitreal injection with sustained-release dexamethasone 0.7 mg implant (Ozurdex®). Primary outcome measures included mean change in BCVA and central foveal thickness (CFT) at 24 months of follow-up compared to the baseline.

Results:

At 24 month of follow-up, the mean BCVA improved from 0.82 ± 0.13 to 0.38 ± 0.06 logMAR (P < 0.0001). The mean CFT reduced from 505 ± 29 to 244 ± 23 um (P < 0.0001). The mean intraocular pressure (IOP) changed from 15.1 ± 2.2 to 16.9 ± 3.1 mmHg with no significant value (P-value = 0.0955). Twenty-one eyes (72.4%) received one injection, whereas eight eyes (27.6%) required two injections. The mean number of injections was 1.2 ± 0.60. The mean follow-up time was 24.75 ± 0.9 months. No serious ocular or systemic adverse events were noted during the follow-up period. Ocular hypertension was recorded in three (10.3%) eyes and controlled by IOP lowering medications. Cataract progression occurred in 11 (37.9%) eyes.

Conclusion:

Our cohort highlights the beneficial effects of the dexamethasone implant of 0.7 mg in the treatment of VKH disease relapsing posterior uveitis improving visual acuity, reducing macular edema, and minimizing the burden of systemic steroids in this sample study.

Microvascular changes in the recurrent cystoid macular edema secondary to posterior noninfectious uveitis on optical coherence tomography angiography

Background

Posterior uveitis represents the second most frequent type of uveitis (15–30% of all uveitis). Noninfectious posterior uveitis complicated with secondary cystoid macular edema (CME) affects the visual prognosis negatively. The objective of the current study is to detect possible microvascular changes causing relapsing uveitis-related CME using optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA).

Methods

This is an interventional, observational, retrospective study with 1 year follow-up. Patients with noninfectious, posterior uveitis-related CME undergoing dexamethasone (DEX) implant were evaluated. Following the DEX-implant were carried out control visits after 1 month, 2-months, 4-months, 6-months, and for up 1-year. A total of 76 eyes of 38 consecutive patients with noninfectious posterior uveitis were enrolled (consecutive sample). Complicated noninfectious posterior uveitis with secondary CME was diagnosed in 56 eyes of uveitis patients (73.7%) and reviewed.

Results

Our investigation showed (1) a reduction in superficial vessel plexus (SVP) measurements within 2-month (84%), reaching 96.4% for up 1-year, (2) an irregular profile of SVP in 69.6% of cases, persisting for up 1-year; relapsing uveitis-related CME eyes with irregular superficial foveal avascular zone (FAZ) profile were in 51%, while the SVP measurements reestablished in 100% of cases. Conversely, (3) the deep vascular plexus (DVP) parameters restored in a lower number of eyes within the 2-month (39.3%), remaining abnormal in 46.4% of cases for up 1-year; despite DVP restored in 53.6% of cases for up 1 year, (4) a capillary rarefaction ring around the FAZ appeared in 80.4% of cases; the relapsing uveitis-related CME eyes with abnormal DVP parameters were present in 41% of cases, of which 92.1% showed a rarefaction ring had abnormal DVP.

Conclusions

The use of OCTA enabled the evaluation in detail of retinal microvascular changes. We suggested that the possibility of the recurrence of the uveitis-related CME depends on the persistence of modifications of the superficial and deep layers. In this regard, we propose to implement the current imaging armamentarium with OCTA for the follow-up of patients with noninfectious uveitis-related CME.

Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant for the Treatment of Macular Edema and Uveitis: A Comprehensive Narrative Review

Purpose

The purpose of this review article is to provide a comprehensive review of the current applications of intravitreal DEX implant (Ozurdex^®, Allergan Inc, Irvine, CA) for a variety of ophthalmic conditions – ranging from FDA approved indications to off-label uses. We have attempted to provide relevant evidence from the literature to help a reader develop an understanding of the biological and pharmacokinetic properties of DEX implant, its uses, and potential side effects.

Methods

PubMed searches were performed using the terms “Ozurdex”, or “intravitreal DEX implant”, AND “retinal vein occlusion”, or “diabetic macular edema”, or “uveitis”. The search was performed in July of 2021, with an additional search in October 2021. All original English language articles were considered for this review.

Results

DEX implant has evidence of efficacy in a variety of clinical situations including macular edema associated with retinal vein occlusion, diabetes, uveitis, and others. Safety concerns include cataract formation and progression, intraocular pressure elevation, complications related to intravitreal injection, and opportunistic infections secondary to steroid-induced immune suppression.

Conclusion

DEX implant is a useful tool in the management of several retinal disorders. Further studies are needed for head-to-head comparison with other treatment modalities and to determine its precise place in clinical practice.

Intravitreal dexamethasone implant for noninfectious uveitis in Chinese patients

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX-I) in Non-Infectious Uveitis (NIU) in Chinese patients.

METHODS

Ninety-one eyes of 77 patients (56 men, 21 women) receiving 130 implant injections for NIU were included. Treatment indication, uveitis diagnosis, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central retinal thickness (CRT), vitreous haze score, intraocular pressure, phakic status, number of injections, time to reinjection, and systemic treatments were collected at baseline, 1 week, 1 month, 3 and 6 months after treatment.

RESULTS

All patients were followed for at least 12 weeks and had a mean follow-up period of 5.1 months (range, 3-14 months) after the first implant. The main treatment indications were macular edema (ME), retinal vasculitis, retinal vasculitis with ME. Sixty-one eyes (67.03%) received only one injection, while 31 eyes (32.97%) received two or more. In eyes that received 2 injections, the mean time to the second injection was 3.83 months and in those that received 3 injections, the mean time to the third injection was 7.5 months. BCVA and CRT significantly improved at 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after treatment. When compared to baseline, the mean prednisone (or equivalent) dosage significantly decreased at 3- and 6-month follow-up evaluations after DEX implantation.14.29% of eyes developed a transient increase in intraocular pressure, and a cataract was removed from 1 phakic eye.

CONCLUSIONS

DEX implants, either alone or in combination with common adjunctive NIU treatments, is safe and effective in the treatment of NIU in Chinese patients.

Topical drug delivery to the retina: obstacles and routes to success

INTRODUCTION

Retinal diseases are one of the main reasons for vision loss where all available drug treatments are based on invasive drug administration such as intravitreal injections. Despite huge efforts and some promising results in animal models, almost all delivery technologies tested have failed in human trials. There are however examples of clinically effective topical delivery systems such as fast dissolving aqueous eye drop suspensions.

AREAS COVERED

Six obstacles to topical drug delivery to the eye have been identified and discussed in some details. These obstacles consist of static membrane barriers to drug permeation into the eye, dynamic barriers such as the lacrimal drainage and physiochemical barriers such as low thermodynamic activity. It is explained how and why these obstacles hamper drug permeation and how different technologies, both those that are applied in marketed drug products and those that are under investigation, have addressed these obstacles.

EXPERT OPINION

The reason that most topical drug delivery systems have failed to deliver therapeutic drug concentrations to the retina is that they do not address physiochemical barriers such as the thermodynamic activity of the permeating drug molecules. Topical drug delivery to the retina has only been successful when the static, dynamic, and physiochemical barriers are addressed simultaneously.

RETAINED, NONDISSOLVING, TUBULAR FOREIGN BODIES IN THE VITREOUS CAVITY AFTER INTRAVITREAL DEXAMETHASONE (OZURDEX) IMPLANTATION

PURPOSE

To describe the retention of large, tubular, nondissolving foreign bodies because of a complication of the intravitreal dexamethasone implant (Ozurdex).

METHODS

This is a single-center, retrospective chart review of patients who were found to have retained, nondissolvable tubular foreign bodies in the vitreous cavity for more than 6 months (the expected dissolution time of the implants) after Ozurdex injections. Ocular symptomatology and multimodal imaging were reviewed.

RESULTS

Five patients had retained, nondissolvable tubular foreign bodies in the vitreous that persisted for months (mean 28.2 months, range 9-67 months) after intravitreal injection of Ozurdex. Two patients were symptomatic due to the foreign bodies and chose alternate local therapy, but none of the patients opted for surgical explantation.

CONCLUSION

Persistent, nondissolving, tubular foreign bodies can be seen in the vitreous cavity for years after injection of the Ozurdex implant. Clinicians should be aware of this complication that has the potential to cause visual symptoms and ocular morbidity.

Outcome of Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant Use in Uveitic Eyes Undergoing Pars Plana Vitrectomy Surgery

Purpose: To report the outcomes in eyes with noninfectious uveitis receiving dexamethasone implant at the time of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV).Methods: Retrospective analysis of visual acuity (VA), intraocular pressure (IOP), vitreous haze score (VHS), and central subfield thickness (CST) at baseline and follow-up visits.Results: Fourteen eyes received dexamethasone implant at the time of PPV. The CST was improved from 469 ± 182 µm at baseline to 320 ± 60 at 6 months (p = .0112) and 295 ± 46 at 12 months (p = .0728). Vitritis only recurred in 2 eyes at 6 months (18.2%) and 1 eye at 12 months (14.3%). The probability of VA improvement of ≥0.3 logMAR was 57% at 6 months and 66% at 12 months. Therapy for IOP rise was initiated in 6 eyes (42.9%).Conclusions: Local delivery of dexamethasone implant with PPV is a feasible method to counteract postoperative inflammation and macular thickening.

Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant in the Treatment of Non-infectious Uveitis

Objectives:

To evaluate the long-term results of intravitreal dexamethasone implant (DEX) for noninfectious uveitis.

Materials and Methods:

The study included 62 eyes of 44 patients treated with DEX implant due to noninfectious uveitis and followed up for at least a year. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central foveal thickness, intraocular pressure (IOP), vitreous haze score, indications, immunomodulatory therapy and steroid usage before/after injection, number of injections, and adverse events were analyzed retrospectively.

Results:

Average follow-up was 20 months (range 12-64 months). The female/male ratio was 29/15. Mean age was 50 years (range 22-75 years). The most frequent uveitis etiologies were idiopathic (25 patients, 40.3%) and Behçet’s uveitis. (17 patients, 27.4%) The signedmost common indication for DEX injection was cystoid macular edema together with resistant vitreous haze (26 eyes, 41.9%). Twenty-two eyes (30%) received more than one DEX injection. Mean BCVA was improved from 0.55 logMAR at baseline to 0.38, 0.32, and 0.35 after 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively (p<0.001 for each). Mean CFT was decreased from 386 μm at baseline to 288, 311, and 302 μm after 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively (p<0.001 for each). Mean IOP did not change significantly during follow-up. Five eyes (8%) received topical anti-glaucoma medication (IOP ≥25 mmHg). Eighteen (46%) of 39 phakic eyes underwent cataract surgery during follow-up. Similar efficacy of the DEX implant was observed in eyes that received multiple injections. Systemic immunomodulatory therapy did not change significantly during follow-up.

Conclusion:

Intravitreal DEX injection does not alter systemic immunomodulatory therapy, but may facilitate the management of noninfectious uveitis by suppressing local intraocular inflammation. Multiple injections yielded comparable visual and anatomical outcomes to single injections. Follow-up for ocular hypertension and cataract formation are important, especially in eyes receiving multiple injections.

Dexamethasone intravitreal implant (OZURDEX®) for macular edema secondary to noninfectious uveitis: a review of the literature

Macular edema (ME) is the leading cause of visual loss in uveitis and may persist long after ocular inflammation has been resolved. Local steroids are the first line treatment for uveitis and uveitic ME. Dexamethasone intravitreal implant (OZURDEX®; Allergan, Inc., CA, USA) has been used to treat diabetic ME and ME secondary to retinal vein occlusion. Recent studies have also demonstrated that Ozurdex may be effective treatment for patients with persistent uveitic ME. In this review, we present the results of the real word studies concerning the efficacy and safety of Ozurdex for the treatment of uveitic ME.

Intravitreal therapeutic agents in noninfectious uveitic macular edema

The management of uveitis is challenging for most treating ophthalmologists. The treatment of uveitis often requires the use of high dose of systemic corticosteroid and immunosuppressive agents, which are almost always associated with potential side effects. Intravitreal medications have become a popular mode of drug administration in uveitis patients as they provide high volume of drug to the target tissues, eliminating the risk of systemic toxicity. There has been tremendous development in the intravitreal therapeutics over the last few years. With the advent of sustained-release technique, increasing patient compliance, biodegradable nature of the implant, and introduction of newer agents with better safety profile, the intravitreal medications have become more popular in recent years. This review presents evidence in the scientific literature supporting the use of intravitreal medications for the management of uveitis and its complications.

Dexamethasone implants in paediatric patients with noninfectious intermediate or posterior uveitis: first prospective exploratory case series

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of dexamethasone (DEX) implants in paediatric patients with noninfectious intermediate or posterior uveitis.

METHODS

Prospective single center exploratory case series. Children and adolescents, 6 to 17 years old, with a vitreous haze score of ≥1.5+ or cystoid macular edema (CME) of >300 μm were enrolled. Vitreous haze score at month 2 was chosen as primary endpoint. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central retinal thickness (CRT) and concomitant medication at month 6 were defined as secondary endpoints. Intraocular pressure (IOP) and cataract formation were determined as safety endpoints.

RESULTS

Three out of 6 eligible patients participated in the case series. At month 2, vitreous haze was reduced from a score of 1.5+ to 0.5+ and 0 and BCVA improved by ≥3 lines, ≥4 lines and ≥2 lines of Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy (ETDRS)-letters, respectively. Visual acuity gain was accompanied by a CRT reduction of -186 μm and -83 μm in the first and third patient, in whom CME was the indication for DEX implantation. A reduction of concomitant medication was achieved in 1 patient. IOP increase was seen in all 3 patients, but could be treated sufficiently with primarily IOP lowering medications and without need for glaucoma surgery. Cataract progression did not occur.

CONCLUSIONS

DEX implants led to an improvement in all endpoints, especially BCVA. This study confirms that IOP rises may also occur in the paediatric population and should be monitored and treated appropriately.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials (EudraCT)- nr: 2013-000541-39.

Treatment of refractory uveitic macular edema: results of a first and second implant of long-acting intravitreal dexamethasone

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to report the functional and anatomical outcomes of a prospective study resulting from repeated dexamethasone intravitreal implants in patients with uveitic refractory macular edema.

Methods

Twelve eyes of 9 patients with intermediate and posterior noninfectious inflammatory uveitis complicated with refractory macular edema were regularly reviewed after a dexamethasone intravitreal implant. Patients were examined at baseline, 30, 90, 135, and 180 days with best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), complete slit-lamp examination, intraocular pressure (IOP), optical coherence tomography, and fluorescein angiography. After 6 months of follow-up, eyes were reassessed to receive a second implant.

Results

BCVA significantly improved when comparing the baseline values after the first and second implant (16.2 and 25.8 letters, respectively, 9.6 letters improvements, p<0.05). BCVA was better after the second implant compared to the first one throughout the follow-up, but without statistical significance. Mean central macular thickness (CMT) was 446.3±129.9 μm at baseline and was significantly reduced until day 135 (p<0.05). CMT reductions after the second injection showed a similar pattern, though differences were not statistically significant. Cataract progression was observed in 4 of 8 phakic eyes (50%) after the first implant, and in 2 of 3 phakic eyes following the second implant, with 1 eye requiring cataract surgery. One eye developed an IOP >30 mmHg 30 days after the second implant, treated topically.

Conclusion

Repeated dexamethasone intravitreal implants in uveitic patients with refractory macular edema can be used effectively in a clinical setting with an acceptable safety profile.