{"title":"在积极治疗方案下植入地塞米松的真实体验:ProDEX 研究。","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.oret.2024.03.019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To assess the effectiveness of switching intravitreal dexamethasone<span> implants (DEX-implant) from pro re nata (PRN) treatment regimen to a proactive regimen in patients with macular edema of diverse etiologies.</span></p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>An observational, retrospective, uncontrolled, multicenter, national case series.</p></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><p>Eighty-one eyes from 68 patients treated between October 2015 and June 2023 were included.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p><span><span>This study included consecutive eyes treated with DEX-implant who were switched from a PRN regimen to a proactive regimen for diabetic macular edema<span> (DME), retinal vein occlusion (RVO), noninfectious </span></span>uveitis<span> macular edema (UME; including postsurgical macular edema), and radiation </span></span>maculopathy (RM).</p></div><div><h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3><p>The main outcome measures were change in the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and intraocular pressure (IOP) at each visit.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>According to the etiology, DME represented 49.4% of eyes, UME 24.3%, RVO 21.0%, and RM 6.2%. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) duration of follow-up under the PRN and proactive regimens was 20.6 (13.3) and 14.2 (10.3) months, respectively. Switching from a PRN to a proactive regimen significantly improved mean (SD) BCVA by 3.7 (12.9) ETDRS letters (<em>P</em> = 0.01) with a mean (SD) decrease in CMT of 108.0 (151.4) μm (<em>P</em> < 0.001). The proportion of visits with significant anatomic recurrence (> 50 μm) also decreased from 40.1% to 6.0% after switching to a proactive regimen (<em>P</em> < 0.001). The number of DEX-implant injections significantly increased during the proactive treatment period (<em>P</em> < 0.001), but the change in the number of visits was not significantly different (<em>P</em> = 0.2). The proactive treatment period was not associated with a significant increase in IOP (<em>P</em> = 0.6).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Switching to a proactive regimen in patients already treated with DEX-implant seems to significantly improve BCVA and CMT while maintaining stable IOP.</p></div><div><h3>Financial Disclosures</h3><p>Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":19501,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmology. Retina","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dexamethasone Implant under a Proactive Treatment Regimen in a Clinical Setting\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.oret.2024.03.019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To assess the effectiveness of switching intravitreal dexamethasone<span> implants (DEX-implant) from pro re nata (PRN) treatment regimen to a proactive regimen in patients with macular edema of diverse etiologies.</span></p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>An observational, retrospective, uncontrolled, multicenter, national case series.</p></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><p>Eighty-one eyes from 68 patients treated between October 2015 and June 2023 were included.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p><span><span>This study included consecutive eyes treated with DEX-implant who were switched from a PRN regimen to a proactive regimen for diabetic macular edema<span> (DME), retinal vein occlusion (RVO), noninfectious </span></span>uveitis<span> macular edema (UME; including postsurgical macular edema), and radiation </span></span>maculopathy (RM).</p></div><div><h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3><p>The main outcome measures were change in the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and intraocular pressure (IOP) at each visit.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>According to the etiology, DME represented 49.4% of eyes, UME 24.3%, RVO 21.0%, and RM 6.2%. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) duration of follow-up under the PRN and proactive regimens was 20.6 (13.3) and 14.2 (10.3) months, respectively. Switching from a PRN to a proactive regimen significantly improved mean (SD) BCVA by 3.7 (12.9) ETDRS letters (<em>P</em> = 0.01) with a mean (SD) decrease in CMT of 108.0 (151.4) μm (<em>P</em> < 0.001). The proportion of visits with significant anatomic recurrence (> 50 μm) also decreased from 40.1% to 6.0% after switching to a proactive regimen (<em>P</em> < 0.001). The number of DEX-implant injections significantly increased during the proactive treatment period (<em>P</em> < 0.001), but the change in the number of visits was not significantly different (<em>P</em> = 0.2). The proactive treatment period was not associated with a significant increase in IOP (<em>P</em> = 0.6).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Switching to a proactive regimen in patients already treated with DEX-implant seems to significantly improve BCVA and CMT while maintaining stable IOP.</p></div><div><h3>Financial Disclosures</h3><p>Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19501,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ophthalmology. Retina\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ophthalmology. Retina\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468653024001672\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmology. Retina","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468653024001672","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Dexamethasone Implant under a Proactive Treatment Regimen in a Clinical Setting
Purpose
To assess the effectiveness of switching intravitreal dexamethasone implants (DEX-implant) from pro re nata (PRN) treatment regimen to a proactive regimen in patients with macular edema of diverse etiologies.
Design
An observational, retrospective, uncontrolled, multicenter, national case series.
Participants
Eighty-one eyes from 68 patients treated between October 2015 and June 2023 were included.
Methods
This study included consecutive eyes treated with DEX-implant who were switched from a PRN regimen to a proactive regimen for diabetic macular edema (DME), retinal vein occlusion (RVO), noninfectious uveitis macular edema (UME; including postsurgical macular edema), and radiation maculopathy (RM).
Main Outcome Measures
The main outcome measures were change in the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and intraocular pressure (IOP) at each visit.
Results
According to the etiology, DME represented 49.4% of eyes, UME 24.3%, RVO 21.0%, and RM 6.2%. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) duration of follow-up under the PRN and proactive regimens was 20.6 (13.3) and 14.2 (10.3) months, respectively. Switching from a PRN to a proactive regimen significantly improved mean (SD) BCVA by 3.7 (12.9) ETDRS letters (P = 0.01) with a mean (SD) decrease in CMT of 108.0 (151.4) μm (P < 0.001). The proportion of visits with significant anatomic recurrence (> 50 μm) also decreased from 40.1% to 6.0% after switching to a proactive regimen (P < 0.001). The number of DEX-implant injections significantly increased during the proactive treatment period (P < 0.001), but the change in the number of visits was not significantly different (P = 0.2). The proactive treatment period was not associated with a significant increase in IOP (P = 0.6).
Conclusions
Switching to a proactive regimen in patients already treated with DEX-implant seems to significantly improve BCVA and CMT while maintaining stable IOP.
Financial Disclosures
Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.