Laser photocoagulation combined with intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection in proliferative diabetic retinopathy with macular edema

The evolving therapeutic landscape of diabetic retinopathy

INTRODUCTION

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of blindness worldwide. Recent decades have seen rapid progress in the management of diabetic eye disease, evolving from pituitary ablation to photocoagulation and intravitreal pharmacotherapy. The advent of effective intravitreal drugs inhibiting vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) marked a new era in DR therapy. Sustained innovation has since produced several promising biologics targeting angiogenesis, inflammation, oxidative stress, and neurodegeneration.

AREAS COVERED

This review surveys traditional, contemporary, and emerging therapeutics for DR, with an emphasis on anti-VEGF therapies, receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors, angiopoietin-Tie2 pathway inhibitors, integrin pathway inhibitors, gene therapy 'biofactory' approaches, and novel systemic therapies. Some of these investigational therapies are being delivered intravitreally via sustained release technologies for extended durability. Other investigational agents are being delivered non-invasively via topical and systemic routes. These strategies hold promise for early and long-lasting treatment of DR.

EXPERT OPINION

The evolving therapeutic landscape of DR is rapidly expanding our toolkit for the effective and durable treatment of blinding eye disease. However, further research is required to validate the efficacy of novel therapeutics and characterize real world outcomes.

Intravitreal steroids for macular edema in diabetes

BACKGROUND

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is secondary to leakage from diseased retinal capillaries with thickening of central retina, and is an important cause of poor central visual acuity in people with diabetic retinopathy. Intravitreal steroids have been used to reduce retinal thickness and improve vision in people with DME.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of intravitreal steroid therapy compared with other treatments for DME.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase on 15 May, 2019. We also searched reference lists, Science Citation Index, conference proceedings, and relevant trial registers. We conducted a top up search on 21 October, 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials that evaluated any type of intravitreal steroids as monotherapy against any other intervention (e.g. observation, laser photocoagulation, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (antiVEGF) for DME.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 trials (4348 participants, 4505 eyes). These trials compared intravitreal steroid therapies versus other treatments, including intravitreal antiVEGF therapy, laser photocoagulation, and sham injection. Most trials had an overall unclear or high risk of bias. One trial (701 eyes ) compared intravitreal dexamethasone implant 0.7mg with sham. We found moderate-certainty evidence that dexamethasone leads to slightly more improvement of visual acuity than sham at 12 months (mean difference [MD] -0.08 logMAR, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.12 to -0.05 logMAR). Regarding improvement of three or more lines of visual acuity, there was moderate-certainty evidence in favor of dexamethasone at 12 months, but the CI covered the null value (risk ratio (RR) 1.39, 95% CI 0.91 to 2.12). Regarding adverse events, dexamethasone increased by about four times the risk of cataract progression and the risk of using intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering medications compared to sham (RR 3.89, 95% CI 2.75 to 5.50 and RR 4.54, 95% CI 3.19 to 6.46, respectively; moderate-certainty evidence); about 4 in 10 participants treated with dexamethasone needed IOP-lowering medications. Two trials (451 eyes) compared intravitreal dexamethasone implant 0.7mg with intravitreal antiVEGF (bevacizumab and ranibizumab). There was moderate-certainty evidence that visual acuity improved slightly less with dexamethasone compared with antiVEGF at 12 months (MD 0.07 logMAR, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.09 logMAR; 2 trials; 451 participants/eyes; I² = 0%). The RR of gain of three or more lines of visual acuity was inconsistent between trials, with one trial finding no evidence of a difference between dexamethasone and bevacizumab at 12 months (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.40; 1 trial; 88 eyes), and the other, larger trial finding the chances of vision gain were half with dexamethasone compared with ranibizumab (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.79; 1 trial; 432 participants). The certainty of evidence was low. Cataract progression and the need for IOP-lowering medications increased more than 4 times with dexamethasone implant compared to antiVEGF (moderate-certainty evidence). One trial (560 eyes) compared intravitreal fluocinolone implant 0.19mg with sham. There was moderate-certainty evidence that visual acuity improved slightly more with fluocinolone at 12 months (MD -0.04 logMAR, 95% CI -0.06 to -0.01 logMAR). There was moderate-certainty evidence that an improvement in visual acuity of three or more lines was more common with fluocinolone than with sham at 12 months (RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.78). Fluocinolone also increased the risk of cataract progression (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.35 to 1.97; participants = 335; moderate-certainty evidence), which occurred in about 8 in 10 participants, and the use of IOP-lowering medications (RR 2.72, 95% CI 1.87 to 3.98; participants = 558; moderate-certainty evidence), which were needed in 2 to 3 out of 10 participants. One small trial with 43 participants (69 eyes) compared intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection 4 mg with sham. There may be a benefit in visual acuity at 24 months (MD -0.11 logMAR, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.03 logMAR), but the certainty of evidence is low. Differences in adverse effects were poorly reported in this trial. Two trials (615 eyes) compared intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection 4mg with laser photocoagulation and reached discordant results. The smaller trial (31 eyes followed up to 9 months) found more visual acuity improvement with triamcinolone (MD -0.18 logMAR, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.07 logMAR), but a larger, multicenter trial (584 eyes, 12-month follow-up) found no evidence of a difference regarding change in visual acuity (MD 0.02 logMAR, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.07 logMAR) or gain of three or more lines of visual acuity (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.30) (overall low-certainty evidence). Cataract progression was about three times more likely (RR 2.68, 95% CI 2.21 to 3.24; moderate-certainty evidence) and the use of IOP-lowering medications was about four times more likely (RR 3.92, 95% CI 2.59 to 5.96; participants = 627; studies = 2; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence) with triamcinolone. About 1 in 3 participants needed IOP-lowering medication. One small trial (30 eyes) compared intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection 4mg with intravitreal antiVEGF (bevacizumab or ranibizumab). Visual acuity may be worse with triamcinolone at 12 months (MD 0.18 logMAR, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.26 logMAR); the certainty of evidence is low. Adverse effects were poorly reported in this trial. Four trials reported data on pseudophakic participants, for whom cataract is not a concern. These trials found no decrease in visual acuity in the second treatment year due to cataract progression.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Intravitreal steroids may improve vision in people with DME compared to sham or control. Effects were small, about one line of vision or less in most comparisons. More evidence is available for dexamethasone or fluocinolone implants when compared to sham, and the evidence is limited and inconsistent for the comparison of dexamethasone with antiVEGF treatment. Any benefits should be weighed against IOP elevation, the use of IOP-lowering medication and, in phakic patients, the progression of cataract. The need for glaucoma surgery is also increased, but remains rare.

The change of macular thickness following single-session pattern scan laser panretinal photocoagulation for diabetic retinopathy

PURPOSE

To identify the incidence and risk factors of macular edema development following single-session pattern scan laser panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) for eyes with diabetic retinopathy.

METHODS

Medical records were reviewed in consecutive patients who underwent single-session PRP for diabetic retinopathy. The eyes with baseline central subfield retinal thickness (CRT) less than 300 μm were included.

RESULTS

Macular edema developed in 11 (8.5%) of 129 eyes 1 months after PRP. In the multivariate analysis, baseline CRT (μm) (odds ratio [OR] = 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.00-1.08, p = 0.048) and presence of intraretinal cystoid spaces or subretinal fluid on spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) images (OR = 38.33; 95% CI = 1.36-1,083.14, p = 0.032) were significantly associated with macular edema development at 1-month visit. Macular edema developed in two (2.1%) of 97 eyes without cystoid spaces or subretinal fluid. The macular edema was spontaneously resolved in five (45.5%) of 11 cases at 3-month visit.

CONCLUSIONS

SD-OCT may be helpful in predicting the development of macular edema, although the macular edema rarely developed after single-session pattern scan laser PRP and was spontaneously resolved in many cases.

Optimization and evaluation of a thermoresponsive ophthalmic in situ gel containing curcumin-loaded albumin nanoparticles

This study aimed to optimize and evaluate a thermoresponsive ophthalmic in situ gel containing curcumin-loaded albumin nanoparticles (Cur-BSA-NPs-Gel). Albumin nanoparticles were prepared via a desolvation method, and the gels were prepared via a cold method. The central composite design and response surface method was used to evaluate the effects of varying Pluronic^® F127 and Pluronic^® F68 concentrations on the sol–gel transition temperature, which is an indicator of optimum formulations. The optimized formulation was a free-flowing liquid below 30.9°C that transformed into a semi-solid gel above 34.2°C after dilution with simulated tear fluid. Results of the in vitro release and erosion behavior study indicated that Cur-BSA-NPs-Gel achieved superior sustained-release effects and that incorporation of albumin nanoparticles exerted minimal effects on the gel structure. In addition, in vivo ophthalmic experiments employing Cur-BSA-NPs-Gel were subsequently performed in rabbits. In vivo eye irritation results showed that Cur-BSA-NPs-Gel might be considered safe for ophthalmic drug delivery. The in vivo study also revealed that the formulation could significantly increase curcumin bioavailability in the aqueous humor. In conclusion, the optimized in situ gel formulation developed in this work has significant potential for ocular application.

Intravitreal steroids for the treatment of retinal diseases

Diabetic macular edema (DME), pseudophakic cystoid macular edema (CME), age-related macular degeneration (AMD), retinal vascular occlusion (RVO), and uveitis are ocular conditions related to severe visual impairment worldwide. Corticosteroids have been widely used in the treatment of these retinal diseases, due to their well-known antiangiogenic, antiedematous, and anti-inflammatory properties. Intravitreal steroids have emerged as novel and essential tools in the ophthalmologist's armamentarium, allowing for maximization of drug efficacy and limited risk of systemic side effects. Recent advances in ocular drug delivery methods led to the development of intraocular implants, which help to provide prolonged treatment with controlled drug release. Moreover, they may add some potential advantages over traditional intraocular injections by delivering certain rates of drug directly to the site of action, amplifying the drug's half-life, contributing in the minimization of peak plasma levels of the drug, and avoiding the side effects associated with repeated intravitreal injections. The purpose of this review is to provide an update on the use of intravitreal steroids as a treatment option for a variety of retinal diseases and to review the current literature considering their properties, safety, and adverse events.

Triamcinolone and bevacizumab as adjunctive therapies to panretinal photocoagulation for proliferative diabetic retinopathy

Purpose. To evaluate efficacy of intravitreal triamcinolone (IVT) and bevacizumab (IVB) as adjunctive treatments to panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) in proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR). Methods. In 60 eyes of 45 patients with PDR, PRP (PRP group), PRP with IVT (IVT group), or PRP with IVB (IVB group) was performed. Regression of new vessels (NV), changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and contrast sensitivity at 1,2, and 6 months were evaluated. Results. Initial mean numbers of active NV and BCVA were 3.45 and 67.35 in the PRP group, 4.35 and 76.65 in the IVT group, and 4.79 and 75.53 in the IVB group. At the 6-month follow-up, numbers of active NV were 2.5 (P = 0.064), 1.11 (P = 0.000), and 1.11 (P = 0.002), and there was a mean loss of 2,6 (P = 0.055), 3.9 (P = 0.011), and 0.9 letters (P = 0.628) in the PRP, IVT, and IVB groups, respectively. Changes in CMT in the PRP and IVT groups were not significant, but significantly increased in the IVB group (P = 0.032). Contrast sensitivity remained stable in PRP and IVB groups and slightly decreased in IVT group. Conclusions. Adjunctive use of both triamcinolone and bevacizumab with PRP lead to a greater reduction of active NV than PRP alone in PDR, although no differences were seen between the two of them.

IVTA as adjunctive treatment to PRP and MPC for PDR and macular edema: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To quantify the effect of a combination treatment of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) injection, panretinal photocoagulation (PRP), and macular photocoagulation (MPC) in patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) and diabetic macular edema (DME).

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We conducted a meta-analysis and searched for reports concerning IVTA injection combined with PRP for the treatment of PDR and DME using Medline, EMbase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and Google according to Cochrane evaluation guidelines. The quality of the reports was evaluated using the Jadad score. Only four studies were ultimately included in this meta-analysis and the fixed-effects model was used. Treatment with IVTA injection combined with PRP and MPC significantly improved BCVA (p<0.001) from one to six months, compared with PRP and MPC alone. There was a statistically significant mean difference in central macular thickness (CMT), at the one-month follow-up (p<0.001). No evidence of publication bias was present. There was a low level of heterogeneity in this group of studies.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

This meta-analysis indicates that IVTA injection combined with PRP and MPC results in an improvement of BCVA, and CMT reduction in patients with PDR and DME.

Current and future approaches in the prevention and treatment of diabetic retinopathy

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a major cause of blindness worldwide and is the number one cause of blindness in working-age individuals in developed countries. We review the current literature and discuss the pathogenesis, modifying risk factors, genetics, and treatment of DR. Special focus is placed on the rationale and effectiveness of therapeutic modalities, both current and future.

Comparison of photocoagulation with combined intravitreal triamcinolone for diabetic macular edema

Purpose

To compare the efficacy between macular laser grid (MLG) photocoagulation and MLG plus intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA; MLG+IVTA) therapy in diabetic macular edema (DME) patients.

Methods

A prospective, randomized, clinical trial was conducted of DME patients. A total of 60 eyes (54 patients) affected by DME were observed for a minimum of 6 months. Thirty eyes of 28 patients who received MLG treatment and 30 eyes of 26 patients who received the combined MLG+IVTA treatment were included in the study. Main outcome measures were BCVA and central macular thickness (CMT) as measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT) at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment. Additionally, the authors examined retrospectively 20 eyes of 20 patients who were treated with only IVTA and compared with the 2 groups (MLG group and MLG+IVTA group).

Results

Baseline BCVA was 0.53±0.32 and CMT was 513.9±55.1 µm in the MLG group. At 1 and 3 months after treatment, the MLG group showed no significant improvement of BCVA and CMT, although there was significant improvement after 6 months. In the MLG+IVTA group, the baseline BCVA was 0.59±0.29 and CMT was 498.2±19.8 µm. After treatment, significant improvement of BCVA and CMT was observed at all follow-up time periods. When comparing the MLG group with the MLG+IVTA group, the latter had better results after 1 and 3 months, although at 6 months, there was no significant difference of BCVA and CMT between the 2 groups. Additionally, the IVTA group showed more improvement than the MLG group at 1 and 3 months but showed no significant difference at 6 months. In addition, the IVTA group showed no significant difference with the MLG+IVTA group at all follow-up time periods.

Conclusions

For DME patients, the combined MLG+IVTA treatment had a better therapeutic effect than the MLG treatment for improving BCVA and CMT at the early follow-up time periods. IVTA treatment alone could be an additional alternative therapeutic option to combined therapy.

Combined laser and intravitreal triamcinolone for proliferative diabetic retinopathy and macular edema: one-year results of a randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate laser combined with intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) for the management of patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) and clinically significant macular edema (CSME).

DESIGN

Randomized clinical trial.

METHODS

settings: Single center. study population: Twenty-two patients with bilateral treatment-naïve moderate PDR and CSME. intervention: Laser (panretinal and macular) photocoagulation was performed in each eye, followed by IVTA in one randomly assigned eye. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), fundus photography, and optical coherence tomography were performed at baseline and at months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12. main outcome measures: Changes in BCVA, central macular thickness (CMT), and total macular volume (TMV).

RESULTS

The mean logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution (logMAR) BCVA improved significantly, and mean CMT and TMV were significantly reduced in the IVTA group compared with the laser-only group (controls) at all study follow-up visits (P < .001). The mean logMAR BCVA (Snellen equivalent) was 0.44 (20/50(-2)) for the IVTA group and 0.38 (20/50(+1)) for the controls at baseline, and 0.12 (20/25(-1)) for the IVTA group and 0.32 (20/40(-1)) for the controls at 12 months (P < .001). The mean CMT and TMV were, respectively, 360 microm and 8.59 mm(3) for the IVTA group and 331 microm and 8.44 mm(3) for the controls at baseline, and 236 microm and 7.32 mm(3) for the IVTA group and 266 microm and 7.78 mm(3) for the controls at 12 months (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of laser photocoagulation with IVTA was associated with improved BCVA and decreased CMT and TMV when compared with laser photocoagulation alone for the treatment of moderate PDR with CSME.

Eye disease and the older diabetic

Elderly diabetic persons are 1.5 times more likely than age-matched nondiabetic persons to develop vision loss and blindness. Annually, between 12,000 and 24,000 diabetic patients in the United States become legally blind because of complications caused by diabetic retinopathy. Even more diabetic persons experience vision loss caused by comorbid ocular and periocular conditions such as dry eye syndrome, cataracts, macular degeneration, and glaucoma. This article discusses the synergy between these conditions and diabetes. Standards of care that slow the progression of vision loss and exciting new research on new strategies of care that may reverse vision loss are presented.