For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
42
views
99
references
 Top references
cited by
230
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      178
      similar
       All similar
      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

      Guidelines for the Management of Diabetic Macular Edema by the European Society of Retina Specialists (EURETINA)

      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

          Diabetic retinal disease is envisioned to become the plague of the coming decades with a steep increase of worldwide diabetes incidence followed by a substantial rise in retinal disease. Improvements in diagnostic and therapeutic care have to cope with this dilemma in a clinically and socioeconomically efficient manner. Laser treatment has found a less destructive competitor in pharmacological treatments. As a consequence of recent rigorous clinical trials, laser photocoagulation is no longer recommended for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME), and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy has emerged as first-line therapy. Steroids have maintained a role in the management of chronically persistent DME. The paradigm shifts in therapy are accompanied by a substantial break-through in diagnostics. The following guidance for the management of DME has been composed from the best updated knowledge of leading experts in Europe and represents another volume in the series of EURETINA recommendations for the management of retinal disease.

          Related collections

          Most cited references99

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

          Randomized trial evaluating ranibizumab plus prompt or deferred laser or triamcinolone plus prompt laser for diabetic macular edema.

          Michael Elman, Lloyd Paul Aiello, Roy Beck … (2010)
          Evaluate intravitreal 0.5 mg ranibizumab or 4 mg triamcinolone combined with focal/grid laser compared with focal/grid laser alone for treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME). Multicenter, randomized clinical trial. A total of 854 study eyes of 691 participants with visual acuity (approximate Snellen equivalent) of 20/32 to 20/320 and DME involving the fovea. Eyes were randomized to sham injection + prompt laser (n=293), 0.5 mg ranibizumab + prompt laser (n=187), 0.5 mg ranibizumab + deferred (> or =24 weeks) laser (n=188), or 4 mg triamcinolone + prompt laser (n=186). Retreatment followed an algorithm facilitated by a web-based, real-time data-entry system. Best-corrected visual acuity and safety at 1 year. The 1-year mean change (+/-standard deviation) in the visual acuity letter score from baseline was significantly greater in the ranibizumab + prompt laser group (+9+/-11, P<0.001) and ranibizumab + deferred laser group (+9+/-12, P<0.001) but not in the triamcinolone + prompt laser group (+4+/-13, P=0.31) compared with the sham + prompt laser group (+3+/-13). Reduction in mean central subfield thickness in the triamcinolone + prompt laser group was similar to both ranibizumab groups and greater than in the sham + prompt laser group. In the subset of pseudophakic eyes at baseline (n=273), visual acuity improvement in the triamcinolone + prompt laser group appeared comparable to that in the ranibizumab groups. No systemic events attributable to study treatment were apparent. Three eyes (0.8%) had injection-related endophthalmitis in the ranibizumab groups, whereas elevated intraocular pressure and cataract surgery were more frequent in the triamcinolone + prompt laser group. Two-year visual acuity outcomes were similar to 1-year outcomes. Intravitreal ranibizumab with prompt or deferred laser is more effective through at least 1 year compared with prompt laser alone for the treatment of DME involving the central macula. Ranibizumab as applied in this study, although uncommonly associated with endophthalmitis, should be considered for patients with DME and characteristics similar to those in this clinical trial. In pseudophakic eyes, intravitreal triamcinolone + prompt laser seems more effective than laser alone but frequently increases the risk of intraocular pressure elevation. Copyright 2010 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
          Article 0 comments Cited 424 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Effect of fenofibrate on the need for laser treatment for diabetic retinopathy (FIELD study): a randomised controlled trial.

            A C Keech, P. Mitchell, P A Summanen … (2007)
            Laser treatment for diabetic retinopathy is often associated with visual field reduction and other ocular side-effects. Our aim was to assess whether long-term lipid-lowering therapy with fenofibrate could reduce the progression of retinopathy and the need for laser treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) study was a multinational randomised trial of 9795 patients aged 50-75 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive fenofibrate 200 mg/day (n=4895) or matching placebo (n=4900). At each clinic visit, information concerning laser treatment for diabetic retinopathy-a prespecified tertiary endpoint of the main study-was gathered. Adjudication by ophthalmologists masked to treatment allocation defined instances of laser treatment for macular oedema, proliferative retinopathy, or other eye conditions. In a substudy of 1012 patients, standardised retinal photography was done and photographs graded with Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) criteria to determine the cumulative incidence of diabetic retinopathy and its component lesions. Analyses were by intention to treat. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN64783481. Laser treatment was needed more frequently in participants with poorer glycaemic or blood pressure control than in those with good control of these factors, and in those with a greater burden of clinical microvascular disease, but the need for such treatment was not affected by plasma lipid concentrations. The requirement for first laser treatment for all retinopathy was significantly lower in the fenofibrate group than in the placebo group (164 [3.4%] patients on fenofibrate vs 238 [4.9%] on placebo; hazard ratio [HR] 0.69, 95% CI 0.56-0.84; p=0.0002; absolute risk reduction 1.5% [0.7-2.3]). In the ophthalmology substudy, the primary endpoint of 2-step progression of retinopathy grade did not differ significantly between the two groups overall (46 [9.6%] patients on fenofibrate vs 57 [12.3%] on placebo; p=0.19) or in the subset of patients without pre-existing retinopathy (43 [11.4%] vs 43 [11.7%]; p=0.87). By contrast, in patients with pre-existing retinopathy, significantly fewer patients on fenofibrate had a 2-step progression than did those on placebo (three [3.1%] patients vs 14 [14.6%]; p=0.004). An exploratory composite endpoint of 2-step progression of retinopathy grade, macular oedema, or laser treatments was significantly lower in the fenofibrate group than in the placebo group (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47-0.94; p=0.022). Treatment with fenofibrate in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus reduces the need for laser treatment for diabetic retinopathy, although the mechanism of this effect does not seem to be related to plasma concentrations of lipids.
            Article 0 comments Cited 275 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Guidelines for the management of neovascular age-related macular degeneration by the European Society of Retina Specialists (EURETINA)

              Ursula Schmidt-Erfurth, Victor Chong, Anat Loewenstein … (2014)
              Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is still referred to as the leading cause of severe and irreversible visual loss world-wide. The disease has a profound effect on quality of life of affected individuals and represents a major socioeconomic challenge for societies due to the exponential increase in life expectancy and environmental risks. Advances in medical research have identified vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) as an important pathophysiological player in neovascular AMD and intraocular inhibition of VEGF as one of the most efficient therapies in medicine. The wide introduction of anti-VEGF therapy has led to an overwhelming improvement in the prognosis of patients affected by neovascular AMD, allowing recovery and maintenance of visual function in the vast majority of patients. However, the therapeutic benefit is accompanied by significant economic investments, unresolved medicolegal debates about the use of off-label substances and overwhelming problems in large population management. The burden of disease has turned into a burden of care with a dissociation of scientific advances and real-world clinical performance. Simultaneously, ground-breaking innovations in diagnostic technologies, such as optical coherence tomography, allows unprecedented high-resolution visualisation of disease morphology and provides a promising horizon for early disease detection and efficient therapeutic follow-up. However, definite conclusions from morphologic parameters are still lacking, and valid biomarkers have yet to be identified to provide a practical base for disease management. The European Society of Retina Specialists offers expert guidance for diagnostic and therapeutic management of neovascular AMD supporting healthcare givers and doctors in providing the best state-of-the-art care to their patients. Trial registration number NCT01318941.
              Article 0 comments Cited 201 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (publisher-id): OPH
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Ophthalmologica
                Journal ID (doi): 10.1159/issn.0030-3755
                Title: Ophthalmologica
                Abbreviated Title: Ophthalmologica
                Publisher: S. Karger AG (Basel, Switzerland karger@ 123456karger.com http://www.karger.com )
                ISSN (Print): 0030-3755
                ISSN (Electronic): 1423-0267
                Publication date (Print): May 2017
                Publication date (Electronic): 20 April 2017
                Volume: 237
                Issue: 4
                Pages: 185-222
                Affiliations
                aDepartment of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; bOphthalmology Department, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; cDepartment of Ophthalmology, Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy; dDepartment of Ophthalmology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; eSchool of Medicine, Dentistry, and Biomedical Sciences, The Queen's University of Belfast, Belfast, UK; fDepartment of Ophthalmology, Medical Faculty Mannheim of the Ruprecht-Karls University Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany; gFaculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark; hDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hôpital Lariboisière, AP-HP, Université Paris 7 - Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France; iDepartment of Ophthalmology, Tel Aviv Medical Center, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
                Author notes
                *Univ.-Prof. Dr. Ursula Schmidt-Erfurth, Department of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, AT-1090 Vienna (Austria), E-Mail ursula.schmidt-erfurth@meduniwien.ac.at
                Article
                Publisher ID: 458539 Other ID: Ophthalmologica 2017;237:185-222
                DOI: 10.1159/000458539
                PubMed ID: 28423385
                SO-VID: 94368784-b9f4-4c5f-bce9-c7918f5b494c
                Copyright © © 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel
                License:

                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
                Date received : 21 December 2016
                Date accepted : 30 January 2017
                Page count
                Figures: 22, Tables: 2, References: 170, Pages: 38
                Categories
                Subject: Review

                ScienceOpen disciplines: Medicine,General social science
                Keywords: Diabetic macular edema,Anti-VEGF therapy,Steroids
                Data availability:
                ScienceOpen disciplines: Medicine, General social science
                Keywords: Diabetic macular edema, Anti-VEGF therapy, Steroids

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content178

                See all similar

                Cited by230

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors2,074

                See all reference authors