International Journal of Retina and Vitreous最新文献

The approval of Syfovre® (pegcetacoplan) and Iverzay® (avacincaptad pegol) for the treatment of geographic atrophy (GA) marks a significant advancement in retinal disease therapy, offering both complement 3 and complement 5 inhibitors. With this breakthrough, an increase in intravitreal injections (IVI) is expected to treat GA, raising questions about potential effects on intraocular pressure (IOP). This concern is exacerbated by the larger injection volume required for GA treatment, potentially impacting IOP. Previous studies have shown that IVI can lead to a temporary increase in IOP with a 0.05 ml injection. This transient elevation is challenging to manage with glaucoma drops, and a preventive approach, such as paracentesis immediately before IVIs, may be more effective. Despite concerns, clinical significance and long-term effects of IOP changes with a 0.05 ml injection remain uncertain. To address these concerns, routine evaluations including macular optical coherence tomography (OCT), fundus autofluorescence, IOP measurements, and retinal nerve fiber layer OCT before the first IVI with avacincaptad pegol and pegcetacoplan are recommended to detect potential changes early. Further research is needed to determine the extent to which IOP changes impact GA patients and whether cumulative effects occur with repeated IVIs, especially in those with additional eye conditions.

Background: The epiretinal membrane (ERM) is a nonvascular fibrocellular tissue formed by cellular metaplasia and proliferation at the vitreoretinal surface and is generally treated by pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with or without internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling. This network meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy of all available ERM removal interventions and assessed the use and efficacy of surgical dyes in managing idiopathic ERMs.

Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and the US National Library of Medicine were searched (June 28, 2023). Clinical studies that included patients with ERMs were included. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were also appraised using Cochrane risk of bias (ROB).

Results: Ten RCTs and ten non-RCTs were included in this study. A pairwise meta-analysis between ERM removal and combined ERM and ILM removal showed no significant difference in visual outcome (change in BCVA) 1 year postintervention (MD = - 0.0034, SE = 0.16, p = 0.832). Similarly, there was no significant difference in the central macular thickness postoperatively between the two groups (MD = - 4.95, SE = 11.11, p = 0.656) (Q = 4.85, df = 3, p = 0.182, I² = 41.21%). The difference in ERM recurrence between the groups was also not statistically significant (OR = 4.64, p = 0.062, I² = 0). In a network meta-analysis, there was no significant difference in visual outcomes between ERM removal only and other treatment modalities: combined ILM and ERM removal (MD = 0.039, p = 0.837) or watchful waiting (MD = 0.020, p = 0.550). In a network meta-analysis, there was no significant difference in the visual outcomes between ERM removal alone and dye-stained combined ERM and ILM peeling (MD = 0.122, p = 0.742 for brilliant blue G; BBG and MD = 0.00, p = 1.00 for membrane blue-dual; MBD). The probability of being a better surgical dye for better visual outcomes was 0.539 for the MBD group and 0.396 for the BBG group. The recurrence of ERM was not significantly different when the ILM was stained with any of the dyes. No study was judged on ROB assessment as having low ROB in all seven domains.

Conclusion: The two types of surgical modalities provided comparable efficacy, with no significant differences between the outcomes. Among the dye-assisted ILM peeling methods, the membrane blue-dual dye was the most effective in providing better structural and functional outcomes.

Telemedicine, the use of telecommunication and information technology to deliver healthcare remotely, has evolved beyond recognition since its inception in the 1970s. Advances in telecommunication infrastructure, the advent of the Internet, exponential growth in computing power and associated computer-aided diagnosis, and medical imaging developments have created an environment where telemedicine is more accessible and capable than ever before, particularly in the field of ophthalmology. Ever-increasing global demand for ophthalmic services due to population growth and ageing together with insufficient supply of ophthalmologists requires new models of healthcare provision integrating telemedicine to meet present day challenges, with the recent COVID-19 pandemic providing the catalyst for the widespread adoption and acceptance of teleophthalmology. In this review we discuss the history, present and future application of telemedicine within the field of ophthalmology, and specifically retinal disease. We consider the strengths and limitations of teleophthalmology, its role in screening, community and hospital management of retinal disease, patient and clinician attitudes, and barriers to its adoption.

Failure to recognize the different possible clinical presentations of ocular toxoplasmosis may delay diagnosis and treatment, compromising visual prognosis. The aim of this paper is to describe an atypical pattern of ocular toxoplasmosis, not yet described. Five Brazilian patients, from 4 different referral centers, presented similar atypical pattern of ocular toxoplasmosis characterized by mild vitritis, foveal cavitation involving predominantly all retinal layers associated with adjacent inner retinal necrosis (a necrotizing retinitis with a persisting inner retinal tissue bridge and loss of subjacent retinal layers). The appearance of the OCT image resembling a "rift", led the authors to define this pattern as a Recurrent Inner Foveal Toxoplasmic Retinitis (RIFTER), which can be considered as a new description of an atypical pattern of toxoplasma retinochoroiditis, and clinicians should be aware of it and consider testing for toxoplasmosis in patients with similar findings.

Purpose: To describe the common risk factors, complications, and management options for anterior migration of Ozurdex implant.

Methods: A comprehensive review of the literature was performed.

Results: Amongst the most common risk factors predisposing to implant anterior migration we found a history of pseudophakia or aphakia or previous vitrectomy. The most common complication is that of corneal edema.

Conclusions: A variety of management options to treat migration of the dexamethasone implant are utilized by different specialists around the world. These depend on the doctor's preference, presence of corneal damage and history of previous migrations after repositioning the implant. The most common approaches are operative or non-operative implant repositioning and surgical implant removal.

Purpose: To review the available evidence on the different retinal and visual prostheses for patients with retinitis pigmentosa and new implants for other indications including dry age-related macular degeneration.

Methods: The PubMed, GoogleScholar, ScienceDirect, and ClinicalTrials databases were the main resources used to conduct the medical literature search. An extensive search was performed to identify relevant articles concerning the worldwide advances in retinal prosthesis, clinical trials, status of devices and potential future directions up to December 2022.

Results: Thirteen devices were found to be current and were ordered by stimulation location. Six have active clinical trials. Four have been discontinued, including the Alpha IMS, Alpha AMS, IRIS II, and ARGUS II which had FDA and CE mark approval. Future directions will be presented in the review.

Conclusion: This review provides an update of retinal prosthetic devices, both current and discontinued. While some devices have achieved visual perception in animals and/or humans, the main issues impeding the commercialization of these devices include: increased length of time to observe outcomes, difficulties in finding validated meaures for use in studies, unknown long-term effects, lack of funding, and a low amount of patients simultaneously diagnosed with RP lacking other comorbid conditions. The ARGUS II did get FDA and CE mark approval so it was deemed safe and also effective. However, the company became more focused on a visual cortical implant. Future efforts are headed towards more biocompatible, safe, and efficacious devices.

Geographic atrophy (GA) is a progressive degenerative disease that significantly contributes to visual impairment in individuals aged 50 years and older. The development of GA is influenced by various modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors, including age, smoking, and specific genetic variants, particularly those related to the complement system regulators. Given the multifactorial and complex nature of GA, several treatment approaches have been explored, such as complement inhibition, gene therapy, and cell therapy. The recent approval by the Food and Drug Administration of pegcetacoplan, a complement C3 inhibitor, marks a significant breakthrough as the first approved treatment for GA. Furthermore, numerous interventions are currently in phase II or III trials, alongside this groundbreaking development. In light of these advancements, this review provides a comprehensive overview of GA, encompassing risk factors, prevalence, genetic associations, and imaging characteristics. Additionally, it delves into the current landscape of GA treatment, emphasizing the latest progress and future considerations. The goal of starting this discussion is to ultimately identify the most suitable candidates for each therapy, highlight the importance of tailoring treatments to individual cases, and continue monitoring the long-term implications of these emerging interventions.

Introduction: Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) affects millions of people globally, leading to a surge in online research of putative diagnoses, causing potential misinformation and anxiety in patients and their parents. This study explores the efficacy of artificial intelligence-derived large language models (LLMs) like in addressing AMD patients' questions.

Methods: ChatGPT 3.5 (2023), Bing AI (2023), and Google Bard (2023) were adopted as LLMs. Patients' questions were subdivided in two question categories, (a) general medical advice and (b) pre- and post-intravitreal injection advice and classified as (1) accurate and sufficient (2) partially accurate but sufficient and (3) inaccurate and not sufficient. Non-parametric test has been done to compare the means between the 3 LLMs scores and also an analysis of variance and reliability tests were performed among the 3 groups.

Results: In category a) of questions, the average score was 1.20 (± 0.41) with ChatGPT 3.5, 1.60 (± 0.63) with Bing AI and 1.60 (± 0.73) with Google Bard, showing no significant differences among the 3 groups (p = 0.129). The average score in category b was 1.07 (± 0.27) with ChatGPT 3.5, 1.69 (± 0.63) with Bing AI and 1.38 (± 0.63) with Google Bard, showing a significant difference among the 3 groups (p = 0.0042). Reliability statistics showed Chronbach's α of 0.237 (range 0.448, 0.096-0.544).

Conclusion: ChatGPT 3.5 consistently offered the most accurate and satisfactory responses, particularly with technical queries. While LLMs displayed promise in providing precise information about AMD; however, further improvements are needed especially in more technical questions.