Search

Significance: Head-mounted low vision devices have received considerable attention in recent years owing to rapidly developing technology, facilitating ease of use and functionality. Systematic clinical evaluations of such devices remain rare but are needed to steer future device development., Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate, in a multicenter prospective trial, the short- and medium-term effects of a head-worn vision enhancement device (eSight Eyewear)., Methods: Participants aged 13 to 75 years with stable vision (distance acuity, 20/60 to 20/400; visual field diameter >20°) were recruited across six sites. Data were collected at baseline (no device), at fitting (with device), and after 3 months of everyday use. Outcome measures were visual ability measured by the Veterans Affairs Low Vision Visual Functioning Questionnaire 48, distance acuity (Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study), reading performance (MNREAD chart), contrast sensitivity (MARS chart), face recognition, and a modified version of the Melbourne Low Vision Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Index., Results: Among the 51 participants, eSight introduction immediately improved distance acuity (0.74 ± 0.28 logMAR), contrast sensitivity (0.57 ± 0.53 log units), and critical print size (0.52 ± 0.43 logMAR), all P < .001, without any further change after 3 months; reading acuity improved at fitting (0.56 ± 0.35 logMAR) and by one additional line after 3 months, whereas reading speed only slightly increased across all three time points. The Melbourne ADL score and face recognition improved at fitting (P < .01) with trends toward further improvement at 3 months. After 3 months of use, Veterans Affairs Low Vision Visual Functioning Questionnaire 48 person measures (in logits) improved: overall, 0.84, P < .001; reading, 2.75, P < .001; mobility, 0.04, not statistically significant; visual information, 1.08, P < .001; and visual motor, 0.48, P = .02., Conclusions: eSight introduction yields immediate improvements in visual ability, with face recognition and ADLs showing a tentative benefit of further use. Overall, visual ability, reading, and visual information showed greatest benefit with device use. Further studies need to examine benefits of practice and training and possible differential effects of underlying pathology or baseline vision.

Importance: Macular edema (ME) is the leading cause of decreased visual acuity (VA) associated with retinal vein occlusion (RVO). Identifying factors associated with better outcomes in RVO eyes treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy may provide information useful in counseling patients., Objective: To investigate baseline characteristics associated with 6-month VA and central subfield thickness (CST) outcomes in participants in the Study of Comparative Treatments for Retinal Vein Occlusion 2 (SCORE2)., Design, Setting, and Participants: A total of 362 patients with central RVO or hemi-RVO were enrolled between September 17, 2014, and November 18, 2015, and randomized 1:1 in a masked fashion to receive bevacizumab or aflibercept. At month 6, 348 participants (96%) had VA outcomes measured and 335 participants (93%) had spectral domain optical coherence tomography outcomes measured. The current data analysis was conducted from February 27, 2017, to April 7, 2017., Interventions: Eyes were randomly assigned to receive an intravitreal injection of bevacizumab, 1.25 mg, or aflibercept, 2.0 mg, at baseline and every 4 weeks, with the primary outcome measured at 6 months., Main Outcomes and Measures: Change from baseline in VA letter score (VALS), VALS gain of 15 or more, change from baseline in CST, CST less than 300 µm, and resolution of ME. Baseline factors associated with 6-month outcome at the 0.05 level in univariate regressions were included in multivariate regressions, with those significant after multiplicity control by the Hochberg method reported., Results: The mean (SD) age of patients was 69 (12) years, and 43% were women. Younger patient age (odds ratio [OR], 0.95 per year of age; 95% CI, 0.93-0.98; P = .007) and lower baseline VALS (OR, 0.96 per letter; 95% CI, 0.94-0.98; P < .001) were associated with a 6-month VALS gain of 15 or greater. Compared with bevacizumab, aflibercept treatment was associated with a higher odds of ME resolution (OR, 3.59; 95% CI, 2.22-5.80; P < .001) and CST less than 300 µm (OR,  5.30; 95% CI, 2.40-11.67; P = .001), but not with a better VA outcome. Macular edema was less likely to resolve in eyes that received anti-VEGF treatment prior to study participation (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.17-0.64; P = .03)., Conclusions and Relevance: In eyes treated with bevacizumab or aflibercept, younger age and worse baseline VALS were associated with better 6-month VA outcomes. Aflibercept treatment was associated with more favorable spectral domain optical coherence tomography outcomes but not VA outcomes. These findings may be useful in assessing expected response at month 6 after monthly injection of anti-VEGF agents for treating ME due to CRVO and HRVO., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01969708.

Aim: To assess the efficacy of pegaptanib as maintenance therapy in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (NV-AMD) patients after induction therapy., Methods: A phase IV, prospective, open-label, uncontrolled exploratory study including subjects with subfoveal NV-AMD who had had one to three induction treatments 30-120 days before entry and showed investigator-determined clinical/anatomical NV-AMD improvement. Lesions in the study eye were: any subtype, 12 or fewer disc areas; postinduction centre point thickness (CPT) 275 μm or less or thinning of 100 μm or more (optical coherence tomography); visual acuity (VA) 20/20-20/400. Intravitreal pegaptanib 0.3 mg was administered as maintenance every 6 weeks for 48 weeks with follow-up to week 54. Booster treatment additional unscheduled treatment for wet age-related macular degeneration, was allowed in the study eye at the investigators' discretion for clinical deterioration., Results: Of 568 enrolled subjects, 86% completed 1 year of pegaptanib. Mean VA improvement during induction (49.6 to 65.5 letters) was well preserved (54-week mean 61.8 letters). Mean CPT was relatively stable during maintenance (20 μm increase during the study). Fifty per cent did not receive unscheduled booster treatment to week 54; 46% did have one such booster (mean 147 days after maintenance initiation)., Conclusions: An induction-maintenance strategy, using non-selective then selective vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors, could be considered for NV-AMD. This approach may have particular relevance for patients with systemic comorbidities who require long-term anti-VEGF therapy for NV-AMD.

Aims To evaluate pazopanib eye drops in patients with subfoveal choroidal neovascularisation secondary to agerelated macular degeneration. Methods 70 patients with minimally classic or occult subfoveal choroidal neovascularisation were randomly assigned to 5 mg/mL TID, 2 mg/mL TID, and 5 mg/mL QD pazopanib eye drops for 28 days in a multicentre, double-masked trial with an optional safety extension for up to 5 additional months. The primary outcomes were central retinal thickness (CRT) and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at Day 29. Results No significant decrease from baseline in CRT was observed overall; however, an exploratory analysis showed improvement in CRT (mean decrease of 89 μm) in patients with the CFH TT genotype who received 5 mg/mL TID (p=0.01, n=5). Mean increases in BCVA were observed in the 5 mg/mL TID overall (4.32 letters (p=0.002, n=26)) and in those that with CFH Y402H TT (6.96 letters (p=0.02, n=5)) and CT (4.09 letters (p=0.05, n=9)) genotypes. No safety signals that precluded continued investigation were detected. Conclusions 5 mg/mL pazopanib eye drops resulted in mean improvement in BCVA at Day 29 and improvements in vision. However, improvement in macular oedema for age-related macular degeneration was found only in the subset of subjects with the CFH Y402H TT genotype, warranting further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a case study of a 32-year-old black pregnant woman, who was having a blurring and greenish discoloration of central vision in her left eye. Her visual acuity in the affected eye was 20/70. Through ophthalmoscopic examination, it was found that the eye had a large, serous macular detachment with central white subretinal exudates. There were also cystoid changes in the retina. It is mentioned that pregnancy is a serious risk factor for the development of central serous chorioretinopathy. After delivery, the serous macular detachment became normal within 12 weeks, and the visual acuity of the patient became 20/20.

Purpose: To determine whether different doses and dosing regimens of intravitreal vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) Trap-Eye are superior to focal/grid photocoagulation in eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME). Design: Multicenter, randomized, double-masked, phase 2 clinical trial. Participants: A total of 221 diabetic patients with clinically significant macular edema involving the central macula. Methods: Patients were assigned to 1 of 5 treatment regimens: 0.5 mg VEGF Trap-Eye every 4 weeks; 2 mg VEGF Trap-Eye every 4 weeks; 2 mg VEGF Trap-Eye for 3 initial monthly doses and then every 8 weeks; 2 mg VEGF Trap-Eye for 3 initial monthly doses and then on an as-needed (PRN) basis; or macular laser photocoagulation. Assessments were completed at baseline and every 4 weeks thereafter. Main Outcome Measures: Mean change in visual acuity and central retinal thickness (CRT) at 24 weeks. Results: Patients in the 4 VEGF Trap-Eye groups experienced mean visual acuity benefits ranging from +8.5 to +11.4 Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters versus only +2.5 letters in the laser group (P ≤ 0.0085 for each VEGF Trap-Eye group vs. laser). Gains from baseline of 0+, 10+, and 15+ letters were seen in up to 93%, 64%, and 34% of VEGF Trap-Eye groups versus up to 68%, 32%, and 21% in the laser group, respectively. Mean reductions in CRT in the 4 VEGF Trap-Eye groups ranged from −127.3 to −194.5 μm compared with only −67.9 μm in the laser group (P = 0.0066 for each VEGF Trap-Eye group vs. laser). VEGF Trap-Eye was generally well tolerated. Ocular adverse events in patients treated with VEGF Trap-Eye were generally consistent with those seen with other intravitreal anti-VEGF agents. Conclusions: Intravitreal VEGF Trap-Eye produced a statistically significant and clinically relevant improvement in visual acuity when compared with macular laser photocoagulation in patients with DME. Financial Disclosure(s): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of intravitreal inserts releasing 0.2 μg/day (low dose) or 0.5 μg/day (high dose) fluocinolone acetonide (FA) in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). Design: Two parallel, prospective, randomized, sham injection-controlled, double-masked, multicenter clinical trials. Participants: Subjects with persistent DME despite at least 1 macular laser treatment were randomized 1:2:2 to sham injection (n = 185), low-dose insert (n = 375), or high-dose insert (n = 393). Methods: Subjects received study drug or sham injection at baseline and after 6 weeks were eligible for rescue laser. Based on retreatment criteria, additional study drug or sham injections could be given after 1 year. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was the percentage of patients with improvement from baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Trial (ETDRS) letter score of 15 or more at month 24. Secondary outcomes included other parameters of visual function and foveal thickness (FTH). Results: The percentage of patients with improvement from baseline ETDRS letter score of 15 or more at month 24 was 28.7 and 28.6 in the low- and high-dose insert groups, respectively, compared with 16.2 in the sham group (P = 0.002 for each). Benefit occurred for both doses compared with sham at 3 weeks and all subsequent time points. The mean improvement in BCVA letter score between baseline and month 24 was 4.4 and 5.4 in the low- and high-dose groups, respectively, compared with 1.7 in the sham group (P = 0.02 and P = 0.016). At all time points compared with sham, there was significantly more improvement in FTH. Subjects requiring cataract surgery were more frequent in the insert groups, and their visual benefit was similar to that of subjects who were pseudophakic at baseline. Glaucoma requiring incisional surgery occurred in 3.7%, 7.6%, and 0.5% of the low-dose, high-dose, and sham groups, respectively. Conclusions: Both low- and high-dose FA inserts significantly improved BCVA in patients with DME over 2 years, and the risk-to-benefit ratio was superior for the low-dose insert. This is the first pharmacologic treatment that can be administered by an outpatient injection to provide substantial benefit in patients with DME for at least 2 years. Financial Disclosure(s): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]