Search

Abstract Background The goal of this study was to evaluate macular microvascular changes in patients with Fabry disease (FD) using optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) and to explore their correlation with laboratory and ocular findings. Methods A total of 76 eyes (38 patients) and 48 eyes of 24 healthy controls were enrolled in this prospective study. Vessel Area Density (VAD) and Foveal Avascular Zone (FAZ) area were calculated on 2.9 × 2.9 mm OCTA images scanned with the Heidelberg Spectralis II (Heidelberg, Germany). VAD was measured in three layers: Superficial Vascular Plexus (SVP), Intermediate Capillary Plexus (ICP), and Deep Capillary Plexus (DCP). All scans were analyzed with the EA-Tool (Version 1.0), which was coded in MATLAB (The MathWorks Inc, R2017b). FAZ area was manually measured in full-thickness, SVP, ICP and DCP scans. Results Average VAD in SVP, ICP and DCP was higher in Fabry disease patients than in controls (49.4 ± 11.0 vs. 26.5 ± 6.2, 29.6 ± 7.4 vs. 20.2 ± 4.4, 32.3 ± 8.8 vs. 21.7 ± 5.1 respectively, p

Abstract Background Selective Retina Therapy (SRT), a photodisruptive micropulsed laser modality that selectively destroys RPE cells followed by regeneration, and Thermal Stimulation of the Retina (TSR), a stimulative photothermal continuous wave laser modality that leads to an instant sublethal temperature increase in RPE cells, have shown therapeutic effects on Age-related Macular Degeneration (AMD) in mice. We investigate the differences between both laser modalities concerning RPE regeneration. Methods For PCR array, 6 eyes of murine AMD models, apolipoprotein E and nuclear factor erythroid-derived 2- like 2 knock out mice respectively, were treated by neuroretina-sparing TSR or SRT. Untreated litter mates were controls. Eyes were enucleated either 1 or 7 days after laser treatment. For morphological analysis, porcine RPE/choroid organ cultures underwent the same laser treatment and were examined by calcein vitality staining 1 h and 1, 3 or 5 days after irradiation. Results TSR did not induce the expression of cell-mediators connected to cell death. SRT induced necrosis associated cytokines as well as inflammation 1 but not 7 days after treatment. Morphologically, 1 h after TSR, there was no cell damage. One and 3 days after TSR, dense chromatin and cell destruction of single cells was seen. Five days after TSR, there were signs of migration and proliferation. In contrast, 1 h after SRT a defined necrotic area within the laser spot was seen. This lesion was closed over days by migration and proliferation of adjacent cells. Conclusions SRT induces RPE cell death, followed by regeneration within a few days. It is accompanied by necrosis induced inflammation, RPE proliferation and migration. TSR does not induce immediate RPE cell death; however, migration and mitosis can be seen a few days after laser irradiation, not accompanied by necrosis-associated inflammation. Both might be a therapeutic option for the treatment of AMD.

Abstract Background Intravitreal injections are a mandatory treatment for macular edema due to nAMD, DME and RVO. These chronic diseases usually need chronic treatment using intravitreal injections with anti-VEGF agents. Thus, many trials were performed to define the best treatment interval using pro re nata regimes (PRN), fixed regimes or treat-and-extend regimes (TE). However, real-world studies reveal a high rate of losing patients within a 2-year interval of treatment observation causing worse results. In this study we analyzed retrospectively 2 years of real-world experience with an individualized treat-and-extend injection scheme. Methods Since 2015 our treatment scheme for intravitreal injections has been switched from PRN to TE. Out of 102 patients 59 completed a follow up time of 2 years. Every patient received visual acuity testing, SD-OCT and slit lamp examination prior to every injection. At each visit an injection was performed and the treatment interval was adjusted mainly on SD-OCT based morphologic changes by increasing or reducing in 2-week steps. Individual changes of the treatment protocol by face-to-face communication between physician and patient were possible. Results After 1 year of treatment visual acuity gain in nAMD was 7.4 ± 2.2 ETDRS letters (n = 34; injection frequency: 7.4 ± 0.4) respectively 6.1 ± 4.7 in DME (n = 9; injection frequency: 8.4 ± 1.1) and 9.7 ± 4.5 in RVO (n = 16; injection frequency: 7.6 ± 0.5). After 2 years of treatment results were as following: nAMD: visual acuity gain 6.9 ± 2.1 (injection frequency: 12.6 ± 0.7); DME: 11.1 ± 5.1 (injection frequency: 14.0 ± 1.0); RVO: 7.5 ± 5.0 (injection frequency: 11.2 ± 0.9). Planned treatment exit after 2 year was achieved in 29.4% of patients in nAMD (0% after 1 year); 0% in DME (0% after 1 year); and 31.3% in RVO (0% after 1 year). Patients’ persistence was 94.1% during the follow-up. Conclusion Using a consequent and individualized TE regime in daily practice may lead to a high patients’ persistence and visual acuity gains nearly comparable to those of large prospective clinical trials. Crucial factors are face-to-face communication with the patient as well as a stringent management regime. At this time TE may be the only instrument for proactive therapy which should therefore be regarded as a first-line tool in daily practice.

Abstract Background The subconjunctival anesthesia with local anesthetics is considered as a low-risk procedure allowing ocular surgery without serious complications typical for retro- or parabulbar anesthesia, especially in patients with preexisting Optic Nerve damage. We report development of ipsilateral transient amaurosis accompanied with mydriasis and both, direct and consensual light response absence. Case presentation Three patients with advanced refractory glaucoma undergoing laser cyclophotocoagulation (CPC) for intraocular pressure lowering experienced these adverse effects just few minutes after subconjunctival injection of mepivacaine 2% solution (Scandicaine® 2%, without vasoconstrictor supplementation). The vision was completely recovered to usual values in up to 20 h after mepivacaine application. Extensive ophthalmological examination, including cranial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), revealed no further ocular abnormalities, especially no vascular constriction or thrombotic signs as well as no retinal detachment. The oculomotor function remained intact. The blockade of ipsilateral ciliary ganglion parasympathetic fibers by mepivacaine may be the responsible mechanism. Systemic pathways as drug-drug interactions seem to be unlikely involved. Importantly, all three patients tolerated the same procedure previously or at a later date without any complication. Overall, our thoroughly elaborated risk management could not determine the causative factor explaining the observed ocular complications just in the current occasion and not at other time points. Conclusions Doctors should be aware and patients should be informed about such rare complications after subconjunctival local anesthetics administration. Adequate risk management should insure patients’ safety.