Primary vitreoretinal lymphoma (PVRL) is a rare type of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma with poor prognosis and the optimal treatment has yet to be determined. Its treatment has evolved from enucleation to ocular radiotherapy, systemic chemotherapy and intravitreal chemotherapy. Radiotherapy can effectively eradicate tumor cells but ocular recurrences are common. Systemic chemotherapy has become the mainstream option but there are problems with only-partial response of PVRL and high rate of recurrence. Intravitreal chemotherapy, primarily used as adjunctive to systemic chemotherapy, has achieved high remission rate and low rate of recurrence as well as with limited ocular complications. The tumor cells were cleared and the visual function preserved. However, issues about the drug applied, treatment protocols and goals of intravitreal chemotherapy, whether for visual preservation or survival improvement, are worthy for further study.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the safety and efficacy of the intravitreal methotrexate treatment in patients with primary vitreoretinal lymphoma (PVRL). MethodsRetrospective non-comparative interventional case series. Fourteen patients (26 eyes) with biopsy-proven PVRL were included in the study. All patients received examination of Snellen chart visual acuity, fundus color photography and optical coherence tomography (OCT). Among the 24 eyes with recordable visual acuity, 17 eyes has initial visual acuity≥0.1 (0.45±0.20) and 7 eyes with initial visual acuity ranged from light perception to hand movement. The vitreous opacities and (or) subretinal yellowish-white lesions and retinal pigment epitheliumuplift were observed in all eyes. All eyes were treated with intravitreal methotrexate (4000 μg/ml, 0.1 ml) injections according to a induction-consolidation-maintenance regimen. For 26 treated eyes, each received an average of (11.5±6.3) injections. Twenty eyes had finished theintraocular chemotherapy, while 6 eyes had not. Eight of 20 eyes were clinically confirmed free of tumor cells by diagnostic vitrectomy, 12 eyes were still with tumor cell involvement.The follow-up was ranged from 2 to 48 months, the mean time was 18 months. The examination of BCVA, fundus color photography and OCT were performed. No tumor cell was defined as clinical remission. Visual acuity was scored as improved or declined obviously (improved or declined 2 lines) or mild improved or declined (changed within 2 lines). ResultsTwenty eyes achieved clinical remission after (3.5±3.6) injections, 12 eyes of 20 eyes with tumor cell involvement before chemotherapy achieved clinical remission after (5.8±3.0) injections. The mean visual acuity of seventeen eyes with initial visual acuity 0.1 in induction phase and at the end of treatment were 0.36±0.23 and 0.56±0.20, respectively. Compared with before treatment, the visual acuity was mild declined in induction phase (t=1.541, P>0.05), but mild improved at the end of treatment (t=2.639, P<0.05). The visual acuity at the end of treatment in 7 eyes with initial visual acuity<0.1 was ranged from no light perception to 0.1. Of 14 patients, 2 patients have been fatal because of brain lesions progression at 42 and 48 months after diagnosis of primary central nervous system lymphoma. No ocular recurrence was noted during the follow-up in 20 eyes who finished intraocular chemotherapy. ConclusionsPVRL patients can achieve clinical remission after (3.5±3.6) injections by intravitreal chemotherapy of methotrexate, and the visual acuity improved mildly. No ocular recurrence was found during follow-up.
Corticosteroids, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor, antibiotics and antiviral were the main 4 classes of drugs for intravitreal injection. Depending on the class and volume of medication, age and gender of patients, ocular axial lengths or vitreous humour reflux, intraocular pressure (IOP) can be elevated transiently or persistently after intravitreal injection. Transient IOP elevation occurred in 2 weeks after intravitreal injection, and can be reduced to normal level for most patients. Only a small portion of such patients have very high IOP and need intervention measures such as anterior chamber puncture or lowering intraocular pressure by drugs. Long term IOP elevation is refers to persistent IOP increase after 2 weeks after intravitreal injection, and cause optic nerve irreversible damage and decline in the visual function of patients. Thus drug or surgical intervention need to be considered for those patients with high and long period of elevated IOP. Large-scale multicenter clinical trials need to be performed to evaluate the roles of the drug and patients factors for IOP of post-intravitreal injection, and to determine if it is necessary and how to use methods reducing IOP before intravitreal injection.
ObjectiveTo observe the efficacy of parsplana vitrectomy (PPV) combined with 0.7 mg dexamethasone sustained-release Ozurdex intravitreal implantation in the treatment of children with ocular toxocariasis (OT). MethodsA retrospective clinical study. Fifty-three pediatric patients (53 eyes) diagnosed with OT and underwent PPV in Beijing Tongren Eye Center of Beijing Tongren hospital from March 2015 to December 2021 were included. There were 30 males and 23 females, with an average age of 7.07±3.45 (4-14) years; all were unilateral. Color Doppler imaging, fundus color photography, optical coherence tomography examinations were performed for patients who can cooperated with the examiners. Forty-three eyes were examined by best corrected visual acuity (BCVA); 47 eyes were examined by intraocular pressure; 29 eyes were examined by ultrasound biomicroscopy. According to the location of granuloma, OT was divided into posterior pole granulomatous type (posterior type), peripheral granulomatous type (peripheral type), and chronic endophthalmitis type. According to whether Ozurdex was implanted into the vitreous cavity after PPV, the children were divided into the oral glucocorticoid group after PPV (group A) and the PPV combined with vitreous cavity implantation of Ozurdex group (group B), 37 cases with 37 eyes and 16 cases with 16 eyes, respectively. There was no significant difference in age (t=0.432), sex composition ratio (χ2=0.117), BCVA (χ2=0.239), and clinical type (χ2=0.312) between the two groups (P＞0.05). The follow-up time after surgery was ≥5 months. The intraocular pressure at 1 week and 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery, the changes of BCVA and the occurrence of complications such as concurrent cataract and epimacular membrane were observed at the last follow-up, and the incidence of obesity in the children during the follow-up period was recorded. The measurement data between groups was compared by independent sample t test; the enumeration data was compared by χ2 test. ResultsOne month after the operation, the intraocular pressure of group A and group B were 15.17±6.21 and 25.28±10.38 mm Hg (1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa) respectively; the intraocular pressure of group B was significantly higher than that of group A, the difference was statistically significant (t=0.141, P=0.043). At the last follow-up, there was no significant difference in the percentage of visual acuity improvement between the two groups (χ2=0.315, P=0.053); there was no significant difference in the incidence of concurrent cataract and epimacular membrane (χ2=0.621, P＞0.05). Among the 37 cases in group A, 32 cases (86.5%, 32/37) developed obesity symptoms during the follow-up period. ConclusionPPV combined with intravitreal implantation of Ozurdex and oral glucocorticoid after PPV can effectively improve the visual acuity of the affected eye; the incidence of complications is similar, however, the incidence of obesity after oral glucocorticoid is higher.
ObjectiveTo observe the efficacy of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) combined with internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling and vitreous injection of mouse never growth factor (mNGF) in the high myopia macular hole (HMMH). MethodsA prospective study. Thirty-one patients (33 eyes) with HMMH diagnosed in Affiliated Eye Hospital of Nanchang University from August 2020 and February 2021 were selected. Before surgery, all included patients were subjected to a complete ophthalmologic evaluation including best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), optical coherence tomography (OCT), macular microperimetry and axial length measurement. The BCVA examination was carried out using the international standard visual acuity chart, which was converted into logarithm of minimum resolution angle (logMAR) visual acuity during statistics. The included subjects were accepted the treatment of PPV combined with ILM peeling and vitreous injection of mNGF (combined group) or PPV united with ILM peeling (simple group), 15 cases with 16 eyes, 16 cases with 17 eyes, respectively. There were no significant differences in logMAR BCVA (t=0.836), macular hole (MH) diameter (t=0.657), visual acuity (VA) (t=0.176), the missing length of external limting membrane (ELM) and ellipsoid zone (EZ) (t=1.255, 0.966) between two groups (P＞0.05). The follow-up time was at least 6 months. The BCVA, closure rate of MH, integrity of ELM and EZ and recovery of VA in macular area were compared and observed between the two groups after surgery. The logMAR BCVA, VA, the deficient lengths of ELM and EZ at different time points were compared by independent-samples t-test between two groups and analysis of variance was used to compare the repeated measurement data of each group. Fisher test was performed for comparison of count data. ResultsSix months after surgery, MH closure rates in the simple group and the combined group were 88.24% (15/17) and 93.75% (15/16), respectively, with no significant difference (P=0.523). At 3 and 6 months after surgery, the integrity recovery of ELM in the combined group was better than that in the simple group, and the difference was statistically significant (t=2.282, 3.101; P＜0.05). At 1, 3 and 6 months after surgery, EZ deletion length in the combined group was lower than that in the simple group, and the difference was statistically significant (t=1.815, 2.302, 2.784; P＜0.05). Compared with 1 week after surgery, VA in macular area of the combined group increased at 1, 3 and 6 months, and the difference was statistically significant (P=0.007, ＜0.001, ＜0.001). At 3 and 6 months after surgery, VA in macular area of affected eyes in the combined group was higher than that in the simple group, and the difference was statistically significant (t=1.897, 2.250; P＜0.05). There was an interaction effect between the surgical method and the follow-up time. The postoperative time was prolonged, and the VA in macular area was decreased in the simple group and increased in the combined group, with statistical significance (F=12.963, P＜0.001). The BCVA and BCVA changes in the two groups increased with the extension of postoperative time. The improvement of BCVA and the difference of BCVA changes in the combined group were significantly higher than those in the simple group at different time points after surgery, with statistically significant differences (F=12.374, 21.807, 5.695, 4.095; P＜0.05). ConclusionPPV combined with ILM peeling and vitreous injection of mNGF is more effective than PPV with ILM peeling for HMMH, improving both anatomical and functional outcomes.
ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) combined with subretinal or intravitreal injection of Conbercept for the treatment of refractory diabetic macular edema (DME). MethodsA retrospective case control study. From June 2022 to March 2024, 32 eyes of 32 patients with refractory DME diagnosed at The Affiliated Eye Hospital of Nanchang University were included in the study. There were 17 male cases with 17 eyes and 15 female cases with 15 eyes. Age was (57.44±8.99) years old; The duration of diabetes was (12.72±6.11) years. All patients had received regular treatment with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) drugs or corticosteroid drugs for at least 5 times, and had undergone focal retinal laser photocoagulation or panretinal laser photocoagulation, the central macular thickness (CMT) persisted or decreased by less than 50 μm. All affected eyes underwent best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure, optical coherence tomography (OCT), microperimetry, and laboratory glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) testing. BCVA was measured using a standard logarithmic visual acuity chart, and converted to the logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) for statistical analysis. CMT was measured using an OCT device. Microperimetry was performed using an MP-3 microperimeter, recording the mean sensitivity (MS) of the retina within a 12° range of the fovea. The affected eyes were treated with 23G PPV combined with internal limiting membrane peeling and either macular subretinal or intravitreal injection of Conbercept, and were divided into subretinal injection group and the intravitreal injection group, each consisting of 16 cases and 16 eyes. The same equipment and methods as before surgery were used for related examinations at 1, 3, and 6 months post-surgery. Changes in BCVA, CMT, and MS were observed and compared, as well as the number of additional anti-VEGF treatments required within 6 months after surgery. Intergroup comparisons were made using independent samples t tests, and repeated measures data were analyzed using repeated measures analysis of variance. ResultsThe age (t=－0.271), gender composition (χ2=0.001), duration of diabetes (Z=－0.868), HbA1c (t=－0.789), intraocular pressure (t=1.689), logMAR BCVA (t=1.393), CMT (t=－0.613), MS (Z=－0.132), and the number of anti-VEGF injections (t=－0.752) between the subretinal injection group and the intravitreal injection group showed no statistically significant differences (P＞0.05). The within-subject effects comparison of BCVA, CMT, and MS at 1, 3, and 6 months post-surgery compared to pre-surgery for all affected eyes showed statistically significant differences (F=8.060, 125.722, 39.054; P＜0.05). The overall comparison of logMAR BCVA between the subretinal and intravitreal injection groups post-surgery showed no statistically significant difference (F=0.662, P=0.422), however, comparisons of CMT (F=4.540) and MS (F=6.066) showed statistically significant differences (P＜0.05). At 1, 3, and 6 months post-surgery, comparisons of logMAR BCVA between the two groups showed no statistically significant differences (t=－0.123, 0.239, 1.087; P＞0.05), comparisons of CMT showed statistically significant differences (t=－3.474, －4.832, －2.482; P＜0.05), comparisons of MS showed statistically significant differences at 1 and 3 months (t=－2.940, －2.545; P＜0.05), but not at 6 months (t=－1.527, P＞0.05). At 6 months post-surgery, the number of additional intravitreal anti-VEGF injections required in the subretinal and intravitreal injection groups showed a statistically significant difference (Z=－2.033, P=0.042). During the follow-up period and at the final follow-up, no complications such as injection site bleeding, retinal detachment, vitreous hemorrhage, macular hole, or retinal pigment epithelial tear or atrophy occurred in all affected eyes. ConclusionCompared with intravitreal injection, subretinal injection of Conbercept for the treatment of refractory DME has more advantages in reducing macular edema and improving visual function in the macular area, and also reduces the number of postoperative anti-VEGF drug treatments.
ObjectiveTo compare and analyze the application of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) drugs for intravitreal injection in the real world before and after the establishment of one-stop intravitreal injection center, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of different management modes. MethodsA retrospective clinical study. A total of 4 015 patients (4 659 eyes) who received anti-VEGF drugs for ocular fundus diseases at the Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital from July, 2018 to June, 2022 were included in the study. There were 2 146 males and 1 869 females. The ocular fundus diseases in this study were as follows: 1 090 eyes of 968 patients with wet age-related macular degeneration (wAMD); 855 eyes of 654 patients with diabetic macular edema (DME); 1 158 eyes of 980 patients with diabetic retinopathy (DR); 930 eyes of 916 patients with macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO-ME). A total of 294 eyes of 275 patients with choroidal neovascularization secondary to pathological myopia (PM-CNV); 332 eyes of 222 patients with other fundus diseases. A total of 13 796 anti-VEGF needles were injected. A total of 1 252 patients (1 403 eyes) from July 2018 to June 2020 were regarded as the control group. From July 2020 to June 2022, 2 763 patients (3 256 eyes) who received anti-VEGF treatment in the intravitreal injection center were regarded as the observation group. The total number of intravitreal injection needles, the distribution of anti-VEGF therapy in each disease according to disease classification, the proportion of patients who chose the 3+ on-demand treatment (PRN) regimen and the distribution of clinical application of different anti-VEGF drugs were compared between the control group and the observation group. The waiting time and medical experience of patients were investigated by questionnaire. χ2 test was used to compare the count data between the two groups, and t test was used to compare the measurement data. ResultsAmong the 13 796 anti-VEGF injections in 4 659 eyes, the total number of anti-VEGF drugs used in the control and observation groups were 4 762 and 9 034, respectively, with an average of (3.39±3.78) and (2.78±2.27) injections per eye (t=6.900, P＜0.001), respectively. In the control and observation groups, a total of 1 728 and 2 705 injections of anti-VEGF drugs were used for wAMD with an average of (5.14±4.56) and (3.59±2.45) injections per eye, respectively; a total of 982 and 2 038 injections of anti-VEGF drugs were used for DME with an average of (4.36±4.91) and (3.24±2.77) needles per eye, respectively. Additionally, a total of 942 and 2 179 injections of anti-VEGF drugs were injected for RVO-ME with an average of (3.98±3.71) and (3.14±2.15) injections per eye, respectively; a total of 291 and 615 injections of anti-VEGF drugs were injected for PM-CNV with an average of (3.31±2.63) and (2.99±1.69) injections per eye, respectively. A total of 683 and 1 029 injections of anti-VEGF drugs were injected for DR with an average of (1.60±1.26) and (1.41±1.05) injections per eye, respectively. The clinical application and implementation of "3+PRN" treatment were as follows: 223 (66.4%, 223/336) and 431 eyes (57.2%, 431/754) in the wAMD (χ2=8.210, P=0.004), 75 (33.3%, 75/225) and 236 (37.5%, 236/630) eyes in the DME (χ2=1.220, P＞0.05), and 97 (40.9%, 97/237) and 355 eyes (51.2%, 355/693) in the RVO-ME (χ2=7.498, P=0.006), 39 (44.3%, 39/88) and 111 eyes (53.9%, 111/206) in the PM-CNV ( χ2=2.258, P＞0.05), respectively. In addition, the results of the questionnaire survey showed that there were significant differences between the control and observation groups regarding the time of appointment waiting for surgery (t=1.340), time from admission to entering the operating room on the day of injection (t=2.780), time from completing preoperative treatment preparation to waiting for entering the operating room (t=8.390), and time from admission to discharge (t=6.060) (P＜0.05). ConclusionsThe establishment of a one-stop intravitreal injection mode greatly improved work efficiency and increased the number of injections. At the same time, the compliance, waiting time, and overall medical experience of patients significantly improved under centralized management.
ObjectiveTo observe the clinical efficacy of dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX) in the treatment of active non-infectious uveitis macular edema (NIU-ME).MethodsA retrospective observational study. From February 2018 to February 2019, 23 patients (26 eyes) were included in the study who were diagnosed with NIU-ME at the Department of Ophthalmology, Central Theater Command General Hospital and received intravitreal DEX treatment. Among 23 patients, there were 8 males (8 eyes) and 15 females (18 eyes); the average age was 46.9 years; the average course of disease was 9.2±2.4 months. All the affected eyes underwent BCVA and intraocular pressure examination; at the same time, OCT was used to measure the central retinal thickness (CMT) of the macula. Snellen visual acuity chart was used for visual inspection. The average BCVA of the affected eye was 0.281±0.191, the average intraocular pressure was 16.2±0.8 mmHg (1 mmHg=0.133 kPa), and the average CMT was 395.4±63.7 μm. Among the 23 patients, 8 patients had middle uveitis and 15 patients had posterior uveitis. Seven patients had received intravenous infusion of methylprednisolone, 5 patients had been treated with methylprednisolone combined with immunosuppressive agents, and 11 patients had not received any treatment. All the affected eyes were treated with DEX intravitreal injection. Patients received repeated visual acuity, intraocular pressure and OCT examination with follow-up after injection. During the follow-up period, patients with recurrence of edema or poor efficacy, systemic methylprednisolone and intravitreal reinjection of DEX, triamcinolone acetonide or methotrexate should be considered based on the patient's own conditions. We observed the changes of BCVA, intraocular pressure and CMT before and after injection in the affected eyes, and analyzed the variance of a single repeated measurement factor. At the same time, we observed the occurrence of ocular adverse reactions and systemic complications.ResultsAfter treatment 1.2±0.4, 3.3±0.3, 6.7±1.1, 9.2±1.1, 12.2±0.6 months, the BCVA of the affected eyes were 0.488±0.296, 0.484±0.266, 0.414± 0.247, 0.411±0.244 and 0.383±0.232; CMT was 280.2±42.7, 271.0±41.4, 292.5±42.9, 276.2±40.5, 268.4±26.6 μm, respectively. Compared with before treatment, the BCVA and CMT of the all eyes increased after treatment, and the difference was statistically significant (F=30.99, 5 196.92; P＜0.000). Among 23 eyes completed a 12-month follow-up, 13 eyes (56.5%) received 2 injections, 3 eyes (13.0%) received 3 injections, and other 7 eyes (30.4%) received only 1 injection. After treatment 1.2±0.4 months, 5 patients (6 eyes) with intraocular pressure＞25 mmHg gradually returned to normal after treatment with two eye drops for lowering intraocular pressure; 1 patient (2 eyes) with intraocular pressure＞40 mmHg, the intraocular pressure gradually returned to normal after 3 kinds of eye drops for lowering intraocular pressure.ConclusionIntravitreal injection of DEX in the treatment of NIU-ME can improve the visual acuity of the affected eye and reduce CMT.
Endophthalmitis caused by intravitreal injection is a rare disease which impair patients’s vision. In recent years, with the increase of the diseases and frequency of intravitreal injections, the incidence of endophthalmitis has increased. Standardizing each step of intravitreal injections is an important method to reduce postoperative endophthalmitis. Despite the current availability of prevention strategies providing by a lot of clinical trials, there are considerable variations and a lack of consensus and inconsistencies in clinical practice. Understanding the existing key measures, standardizing the operation of intravitreal injection in my country, and minimizing the incidence of infective endophthalmitis are of positive significance for improving the treatment of ophthalmology, especially fundus diseases.
Gene therapy is designed to introduce genetic material into the cells of a patient via virus to enhance, inhibit, edit or add a genetic sequence, results in a therapeutic or prophylactic effect. Gene therapy has brought positive influence and great potential for the treatment of retinal diseases including genetic retinal diseases and acquired retinal diseases. In addition to the constant optimization of gene vectors, the exploration of different drug delivery techniques has brought different therapeutic effects for gene therapy of retinal diseases. The main delivery methods include subretinal injection, intravitreal injection, suprachoroidal injection. Considering the transfection efficiency and safety of delivery methods, emerging sub-inner limiting membrane injection and noninvasive gene delivery are under investigation. The selection of gene delivery method is very important for the safety and effectiveness of gene therapy for retinal diseases. It is not only related to the development of equipment and technology, but also related to the modification of adeno-associated virus, the selection of promoter and the specific retinal cells that the target gene wants to be transfected. Therefore, the most appropriate method of gene delivery should be selected according to the final gene therapy agent and the specific transfected cells after taking all these factors into consideration.