Management of center-involving diabetic macular edema represents a real therapeutic challenge. Diabetic macular edema is the leading cause of visual acuity impairment in diabetic patients. Since the advent of intravitreal drugs, management of diabetic macular edema has significantly evolved. The historical grid laser photocoagulation is no longer recommended as first-line treatment of diabetic macular edema owing to the findings of the pivotal randomized controlled trials, and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy has emerged as first-line therapy. Steroids also represent a valid treatment option in the management of naïve diabetic macular edema and their efficacy has also been confirmed in several studies. The optimal treatment for diabetic macular edema should consider both general and ophthalmological comorbidities. Patient compliance and motivation should also be carefully evaluated as some treatments require monthly follow-up. Based on recent literature evidence, the present review provides clinicians with a first-line treatment algorithm for center-involving diabetic macular edema tailored to the patient’s individual characteristics.

The aim of the present study was to determine the efficacy and safety of intravitreal brolucizumab therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) in the real-world setting. The REBA study (real-world experience with brolucizumab in wet AMD) was a retrospective, observational, multicentric study that included 78 consecutive patients (105 eyes), with neovascular AMD, who received brolucizumab therapy. Both treatment-naive and switch-therapy patients were included. Switch therapy was based either on fluid recurrence, fluid recalcitrance, or inability to extend beyond q4/q6. All relevant data were collected. The primary outcome measure was change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) over time. Secondary outcome measures included determination of change in central subfield thickness (CST) and complications. The mean baseline BCVA was 49.4 ± 5.4 letters and 40 ± 3.2 letters, and corresponding mean BCVA gain was +11.9 ± 3.9 letters (p = 0.011) and +10.4 ± 4.8 letters (p = 0.014) in the treatment-naive and switch-therapy groups, respectively. The change in CST was significantly decreased in the treatment-naive (p = 0.021) and the switch-therapy (p = 0.013) groups. The mean follow-up was 10.4 months in both groups. One patient in the switch-therapy group developed vascular occlusion and another a macular hole after the fifth brolucizumab injection. Both patients recovered uneventfully. In conclusion, patients showed a very good anatomical and functional response to brolucizumab therapy in the real world, regardless of prior treatment status, until the end of the follow-up period. Two significant untoward events were noted.

Optic capture of 3-piece hydrophobic acrylic IOLs could be achieved in most eyes. The VAO, glaucoma, and inflammation were comparable 12 months postoperatively. Thus, optic capture of an IOL is an alternative surgical technique that can be used to avoid vitrectomy, even in children younger than 4 years.

Our study shows no significant correlation between macular hole angle and hole closure. Minimum diameter between the edges and longest diameter of the hole are best predictors of hole closure and postoperative VA.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcomes of a new posterior chamber phakic intraocular lens (IPCL; Care Group, Baroda, India) to correct myopia. METHODS: This prospective, observational case series included 30 eyes undergoing implantation of the IPCL for high myopia (> −8.00 diopters [D]). Uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuities, refraction, vault, endothelial cell loss, and adverse events were evaluated 3 years after implantation of the IPCL for high myopia. RESULTS: The mean spherical equivalent decreased from −16.50 ± 5.62 D preoperatively to −0.89 ± 1.27 D at 3 years. The mean UDVA and CDVA were 0.38 ± 0.21 and 0.24 ± 0.09 logMAR. No eye lost any lines and 49% of eyes gained one line or more of CDVA. One eye (3.3%) developed anterior subcapsular cataract, but did not require cataract surgery at 3 years of follow-up. Two eyes (6.6%) developed a mild transient increase in intraocular pressure, which required topical medication only for 3 months. The percentage of endothelial cell loss at 3 years was 9.73% ± 6.72%. The IPCL vault tended to reduce with time, from a mean of 626.66 ± 188.98 μ m at 1 month to 540.22 ± 210.76 μ m at 3 years. No vision-threatening complications occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Implantation of the new posterior chamber phakic IOL is an effective alternative to correct high myopia, showing good outcomes at 3 years. [ J Refract Surg . 2018;34(12):817–823.]

No abstract

Purpose: To describe endogenous endophthalmitis in the setting of COVID-19 pneumonia.Methods: Patients recovering from COVID-19 pneumonia who presented to our department with any or all of the following complaints: pain, watering, redness, and decreased vision were identified. All relevant data were collected for analysis.Results: Three patients with endogenous endophthalmitis were identified. All patients had been treated for COVID-19 pneumonia and therefore had received remdesivir and systemic steroids; 2 of the 3 patients received tocilizumab. All patients received vitreous biopsy, vitrectomy, and intraocular antibiotic injection. Patient 1 demonstrated Klebsiella pneumoniae in blood culture, K. pneumoniae and Escherichia coli in urine culture, and K. pneumoniae in vitreous fluid, whereas Patients 2 and 3 demonstrated Stenotrophomonas maltophilia and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in the blood and nasopharyngeal culture, respectively. Correspondingly, the same organism was cultured from vitreous in Patients 2 and 3. The visual acuity at the last follow-up in Patients 1 to 3 was 20/100, 20/80, and 20/40, respectively. The probable source of infection was identified in each as renal calculi, dental caries, and the pharynx, respectively. Real-time polymerase chain reaction demonstrated the presence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in the vitreous fluid of Patient 1. Conclusion:We report good outcomes of early intervention for endogenous endophthalmitis in the setting of COVID-19 infection. We also document the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in vitreous.

Purpose: The aim of this consensus article was to provide comprehensive recommendations in the management of diabetic macular edema (DME) by reviewing recent clinical evidence. Design: A questionnaire containing 47 questions was developed which encompassed clinical scenarios such as treatment response to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor and steroid, treatment side effects, as well as cost and compliance/reimbursement in the management of DME using a Dephi questionnaire as guide. Methods: An expert panel of 12 retinal specialists from Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines, India and Vietnam responded to this questionnaire on two separate occasions. The first round responses were compiled, analyzed and discussed in a round table discussion where a consensus was sought through voting. Consensus was considered achieved, when 9 of the 12 panellists (75%) agreed on a recommendation. Results: The DME patients were initially profiled based on their response to treatment, and the terms target response, adequate response, nonresponse, and inadequate response were defined. The panellists arrived at a consensus on various aspects of DME treatment such as need for classification of patients before treatment, first-line treatment options, appropriate time to switch between treatment modalities, and steroid-related side effects based on which recommendations were derived, and a treatment algorithm was developed. Conclusions: This consensus article provides comprehensive, evidence-based treatment guidelines in the management of DME in Asian population. In addition, it also provides recommendations on other aspects of DME management such as steroid treatment for stable glaucoma patients, management of intraocular pressure rise, and recommendations for cataract development.