Efficacy and tolerability of bilateral sustained-release dexamethasone intravitreal implants for the treatment of noninfectious posterior uveitis and macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion
Steven J Ryder,1 Danilo Iannetta,1 Swetangi D Bhaleeya,2 Szilárd Kiss1 1Department of Ophthalmology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA; 2Department of Ophthalmology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA Purpose: To report our experience with bilateral placement of...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Dove Medical Press
2015
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/033d297b5fb74a07ab13a9dc23dff09f |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | Steven J Ryder,1 Danilo Iannetta,1 Swetangi D Bhaleeya,2 Szilárd Kiss1 1Department of Ophthalmology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA; 2Department of Ophthalmology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA Purpose: To report our experience with bilateral placement of dexamethasone 0.7 mg (DEX) sustained-release intravitreal implant in the management of noninfectious posterior uveitis or macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion.Methods: A retrospective chart review of patients with bilateral noninfectious posterior uveitis and macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion who were treated with DEX intravitreal implant was performed. Ocular side effects such as intraocular pressure (IOP), cataract, and tolerability of bilateral injections was reviewed.Results: Twenty-two eyes of eleven patients treated with a total of 32 DEX implants were included. Ten of eleven patients received bilateral implants due to active noninfectious uveitis while the other demonstrated macular edema in both eyes following separate central retinal vein occlusions. Among the patients with bilateral uveitis, the mean interval between DEX implant in the initial eye and the subsequent DEX in the fellow eye was 15.6 days (range 2–71 days). Seven of the ten patients received the second implant in the fellow eye within 8 days of the initial implantation. None of the patients had bilateral implantations on the same day. Seven eyes required reimplantation for recurrence of inflammation (mean interval between first and repeat implantation was 6.00±2.39 months). Following single or, in the case of the aforementioned seven eyes, repeat DEX implantation, all 20 uveitic eyes demonstrated clinical and/or angiographic evidence of decreased inflammation in the form of reduction in vitreous cells on slit lamp ophthalmoscopy, macular edema on ophthalmoscopy, or optical coherence tomography and/or disc and vascular leakage on fluorescein angiography. The mean follow-up for all eyes after initial implantation was 23.57 months (range 1–48 months). IOP was significantly higher (P=0.028) at 6 months (16.62 mmHg ±5.97) but not (P=0.82) at most recent follow-up (14.9±3.37 mmHg) when compared with baseline (14.68±3.02 mmHg). Four eyes (18.2%) required initiation of IOP-lowering medications. During the follow-up period, no eyes underwent filtration or cataract extraction. No serious ocular adverse effects were noted during the follow-up period.Conclusion: In patients with bilateral noninfectious posterior uveitis and macular edema secondary to vein occlusion, bilateral injection of DEX intravitreal implant was well tolerated and had an acceptable safety profile. Keywords: bilateral uveitis, dexamethasone implant, Ozurdex |
|---|