When a storm is brewing inside of the vitreous, how do you get to the destination safely? Before the 1995 EVS study, there was no clear consensus on how to utilize vitrectomy and IV antibiotics for patients with post-op endophthalmitis. Therefore, the EVS study sought to define a treatment protocol for these scary cases. In the study, 420 patients with clinical evidence of endophthalmitis within 6 weeks after cataract surgery or secondary intraocular lens implantation were randomly assigned to four groups with combinations of pars plana vitrectomy PPV or no PPV, and treatment with or without systemic antibiotics.
Overall, EVS established an LP cutoff for routine PPV in post-op endophthalmitis. If a patient can see HM, you can wave them goodbye instead of taking straight to the OR.
Does prophylactic photocoagulation help central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) outcomes? This phase 3 randomized control trial in 1995 analyzed patients who had CRVO within the last year and split them into Group N (181 patients with nonperfused CRVO with no neovascularization) and Group M (151 patients with 20/50 or worse visual acuity and macular edema secondary to CRVO). The primary outcome for Group N was regression of the development of neovascularization after prophylactic pan-retinal photocoagulation (PRP). The primary outcome for Group M was visual acuity after macular grid laser therapy at 3 years.
Overall, the CVOS study is a landmark study because it did not support prophylactic photocoagulation being utilized for the treatment of CRVO. While treatment regimens have changed since the development of Anti-VEGF agents and improved clinical imaging (OCT), the CVOS remains one of the important foundational studies in the field.
Corticosteroids reduce macular edema in patients with retinal vein occlusion? SCORE! The Standard Care vs Corticosteroid for Central Retinal Vein Occlusion (SCORE-CRVO) sought to determine the optimal treatment for vision loss associated with macular edema secondary to perfused central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO). 271 patients from 66 clinical sites were randomized to three groups: observation (n=88), 1mg intravitreal triamcinolone (n=92), 4mg intravitreal triamcinolone (n=91). Participants were retreated at 4-month intervals for 36 months.
Overall, the SCORE-CRVO is a landmark study because it led to a major shift in the treatment of vision loss associated with macular edema secondary to CRVO. Prior to this study, there was no proven, effective treatment for this condition and the standard of care was observation. The results demonstrate both 1-mg and 4-mg intravitreal triamcinolone had better visual acuity outcomes over 12 months compared to the untreated natural course of disease. Given the safety profile of the low dose, particularly with respect to glaucoma and cataract, 1-mg intravitreal triamcinolone became the preferred treatment of macular edema in patients with CRVO. Shortly after this study, however, another set of Landmark studies (BRAVO & CRUISE) enlightened us to even more effective treatment options.
Keep your friends close, but your anti-VEGF injections closer… The BRAVO and CRUISE trials looked to find the best course of treatment for macular edema in the setting of branch and central retinal vein occlusions. Prior to this, laser therapy had proven to be ineffective and patients were simply observed with little hope in visual improvement. In the BRAVO and CRUISE trials, patients with macular edema following BRVO (n=397) and CRVO (n=392) were randomized to receive monthly intravitreal injections of 0.3 or 0.5 mg of ranibizumab or sham injections.
The importance of this study was showing that anti-VEGF injections were effective in treating macular edema following retinal vein occlusions leading to marked improvement in visual acuity while still maintaining a very low risk of complications.
When things seem blurry, a PIVOT in your vision can bring them back into focus. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the results of pneumatic retinopexy (PnR, n=77) and pars plana vitrectomy (PPV=73) as treatment options for primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) involving the superior retina.
Overall, the PIVOT landmark study demonstrated that pneumatic retinopexy is recommended as the initial treatment for eligible superior RRDs, as it offers superior visual acuity, fewer metamorphopsias, and a lower complication rate compared to vitrectomy.
Content of The Lens is for medical education purposes only.
Copyright © 2021 The Lens Newsletter LLC - All Rights Reserved.