7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      Are you tired of sifting through news that doesn't interest you?
      Personalize your Karger newsletter today and get only the news that matters to you!

      Sign up

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant: An Effective Adjunctive Treatment for Recalcitrant Noninfectious Uveitis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose: To describe our experience in treating recalcitrant and severe cases of noninfectious posterior uveitis with the 0.7-mg dexamethasone intravitreal implant as adjunctive anti-inflammatory treatment. Procedures: Retrospective study. Twelve patients (8 females; 4 males; 14 affected eyes, 15 implants) with severe recalcitrant uveitis were treated. Patients had an inadequate control of uveitis despite different immunosuppressants and periocular corticosteroid therapy. Primary outcome measures evaluated were: decrease in uveitis activity, improvement in visual acuity, reduction of macular thickness, and occurrence of adverse events. Results: Uveitis activity decreased in all patients after the implant. The mean follow-up time from injection was 9 months. Best-corrected visual acuity improved from 20/80 to 20/40 at the end of follow-up. The mean retinal thickness improved from 496 to 226 µm. Adverse events encountered were: 3 eyes with intraocular pressure elevation, 1 vitreous hemorrhage and 1 subconjunctival hemorrhage. Three patients reduced the daily systemic corticosteroid dosage after treatment. Conclusions: The 0.7-mgdexamethasone intravitreal implant appears to be a novel and promising adjunctive treatment for patients with severe posterior noninfectious uveitis recalcitrant to different immunosuppressive agents.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Dexamethasone intravitreal implant in patients with macular edema related to branch or central retinal vein occlusion twelve-month study results.

          To evaluate the safety and efficacy of 1 or 2 treatments with dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX implant) over 12 months in eyes with macular edema owing to branch or central retinal vein occlusion (BRVO or CRVO). Two identical, multicenter, prospective studies included a randomized, 6-month, double-masked, sham-controlled phase followed by a 6-month open-label extension. We included 1256 patients with vision loss owing to macular edema associated with BRVO or CRVO. At baseline, patients received DEX implant 0.7 mg (n = 421), DEX implant 0.35 mg (n = 412), or sham (n = 423) in the study eye. At day 180, patients could receive DEX implant 0.7 mg if best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was 250 μm. The primary outcome for the open-label extension was safety; BCVA was also evaluated. At day 180, 997 patients received open-label DEX implant. Except for cataract, the incidence of ocular adverse events was similar in patients who received their first or second DEX implant. Over 12 months, cataract progression occurred in 90 of 302 phakic eyes (29.8%) that received 2 DEX implant 0.7 mg injections versus 5 of 88 sham-treated phakic eyes (5.7%); cataract surgery was performed in 4 of 302 (1.3%) and 1 of 88 (1.1%) eyes, respectively. In the group receiving two 0.7-mg DEX implants (n = 341), a ≥ 10-mmHg intraocular pressure (IOP) increase from baseline was observed in (12.6% after the first treatment, and 15.4% after the second). The IOP increases were usually transient and controlled with medication or observation; an additional 10.3% of patients initiated IOP-lowering medications after the second treatment. A ≥ 15-letter improvement in BCVA from baseline was achieved by 30% and 32% of patients 60 days after the first and second DEX implant, respectively. Among patients with macular edema owing to BRVO or CRVO, single and repeated treatment with DEX implant had a favorable safety profile over 12 months. In patients who qualified for and received 2 DEX implant injections, the efficacy and safety of the 2 implants were similar with the exception of cataract progression. Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references. Copyright © 2011 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Dexamethasone intravitreal implant for noninfectious intermediate or posterior uveitis.

            To evaluate the safety and efficacy of 2 doses of dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX implant) for treatment of noninfectious intermediate or posterior uveitis. In this 26-week trial, eyes with noninfectious intermediate or posterior uveitis were randomized to a single treatment with a 0.7-mg DEX implant (n = 77), 0.35-mg DEX implant (n = 76), or sham procedure (n = 76). The main outcome measure was the proportion of eyes with a vitreous haze score of 0 at week 8. The proportion of eyes with a vitreous haze score of 0 at week 8 was 47% with the 0.7-mg DEX implant, 36% with the 0.35-mg DEX implant, and 12% with the sham (P .05 at any visit). The incidence of cataract reported in the phakic eyes was 9 of 62 (15%) with the 0.7-mg DEX implant, 6 of 51 (12%) with the 0.35-mg DEX implant, and 4 of 55 (7%) with the sham (P > .05). In patients with noninfectious intermediate or posterior uveitis, a single DEX implant significantly improved intraocular inflammation and visual acuity persisting for 6 months. Application to Clinical Practice Dexamethasone intravitreal implant may be used safely and effectively for treatment of intermediate and posterior uveitis. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00333814.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              The possible impact of uveitis in blindness: a literature survey.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                OPH
                Ophthalmologica
                10.1159/issn.0030-3755
                Ophthalmologica
                S. Karger AG
                0030-3755
                1423-0267
                2012
                October 2012
                03 October 2012
                : 228
                : 4
                : 229-233
                Affiliations
                Department of Ophthalmology, University Vita-Salute, Scientific Institute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
                Author notes
                *Elisabetta Miserocchi, Department of Ophthalmology, Scientific Institute San Raffaele, University Vita-Salute, Via Olgettina 60, IT–20132 Milan (Italy), E-Mail miserocchi.elisabetta@hsr.it
                Article
                343060 Ophthalmologica 2012;228:229–233
                10.1159/000343060
                23038070
                7dacda4a-b876-4c64-8dbe-d3552d599642
                © 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                History
                : 03 July 2012
                : 07 July 2012
                Page count
                Tables: 2, Pages: 5
                Categories
                EURETINA – Original Paper

                Vision sciences,Ophthalmology & Optometry,Pathology
                Uveitis,Intravitreal dexamethasone,Corticosteroids,Macular edema

                Comments

                Comment on this article