Macular Edema: The Current Recommendations for Clinical Practice

A special issue of Journal of Clinical Medicine (ISSN 2077-0383). This special issue belongs to the section "Ophthalmology".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (20 December 2021) | Viewed by 23169

Printed Edition Available!
A printed edition of this Special Issue is available here.

Special Issue Editor


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Dobry Wzrok Ophthalmological Clinic, Gdansk, Poland
Interests: central serous chorioretinopathy; subthreshold diode micropulse; OCT-angiography; fluorescein angiography; laser photocoagulation; intravitreal injections
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Macular edema is a common clinical entity that has variable etiopathogenic background. Advances in ophthalmological technology, especially the advent of OCT – angiography, have made diagnostics of that syndrome more profound and shed a different light into its classifications and therapeutic approaches. On the other hand introduction of intravitreal therapies to ophthalmological practice has revolutionized treatment of macular edema and gave a different perspective for the use of classical laser photocoagulation in such cases. It also made research redirect towards non-damaging retinal therapies such as subthreshold laser treatment applied in pulsed mode. No matter how we appreciate advances in the diagnostics and treatment of macular edema, there are still many issues that remain a medical mystery. That situation, sometimes, has a consequence in the lack of strong therapeutic recommendations supported by relevant research. This special issue will open for discussion and sharing of experience of authors whose efforts aim towards creating precise recommendations for the treatment of macular edema in different ophthalmological diseases, including combination of intravitreal injections with other forms of treatment. We also expect researchers to publish material that would present and analyze diagnostic puzzles that are often encountered when dealing with that clinical entity.  

Dr. Gawęcki Maciej
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Journal of Clinical Medicine is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • diabetic macular edema
  • retinal vascular disease
  • retinal vein occlusion
  • macular telangiectasia
  • subthreshold photocoagulation
  • subthreshold diode micropulse
  • anti-VEGF
  • intravitreal injections
  • OCT-angiography
  • optical coherence tomography
  • fluorescein angiography

Published Papers (9 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

7 pages, 727 KiB  
Article
Clinical Outcome and Drug Expenses of Intravitreal Therapy for Diabetic Macular Edema: A Retrospective Study in Sardinia, Italy
by Chiara Altana, Matthew Gavino Donadu, Stefano Dore, Giacomo Boscia, Gabriella Carmelita, Stefania Zanetti, Francesco Boscia and Antonio Pinna
J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10(22), 5342; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10225342 - 16 Nov 2021
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 1722
Abstract
Background: Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a leading cause of visual loss in working-age adults. The purpose of this retrospective study was to perform an epidemiological analysis on DME patients treated with intravitreal drugs in a tertiary hospital. The clinical outcome, adverse drug [...] Read more.
Background: Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a leading cause of visual loss in working-age adults. The purpose of this retrospective study was to perform an epidemiological analysis on DME patients treated with intravitreal drugs in a tertiary hospital. The clinical outcome, adverse drug reactions (ADRs), and intravitreal drug expenses were assessed. Methods: All DME patients treated with Ranibizumab, Aflibercept, Dexamethasone implant, and Fluocinolone Acetonide implant at the Sassari University Hospital, Italy, between January 2017 and June 2020 were included. Central macular thickness (CMT) and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were measured. ADRs and drug expenses were analyzed. Results: Two-hundred thirty-one DME patients (mean age: 65 years) received intravitreal agents. Mean CMT and BCVA were 380 μm and 0.5 LogMAR at baseline, 298 μm and 0.44 logMAR after one year (p = 0.04), and 295 μm and 0.4 logMAR at the end of the follow-up period. A total of 1501 intravitreal injections were given; no major ADRs were reported. Treatment cost was €915,000 (€261,429/year). Twenty non-responders to Ranibizumab or Aflibercept were switched to a Dexamethasone implant. In these patients, mean CMT and BCVA were 468 µm and 0.5 LogMar at the time of switching and 362 µm and 0.3 LogMar at the end of the follow-up (p = 0.00014 and p = 0.08, respectively). Conclusion: Results confirm that Ranibizumab, Aflibercept, and Dexamethasone implant are effective and safe in DME treatment. A switch to Dexamethasone implant for patients receiving Aflibercept or Ranibizumab with minimal/no clinical benefit should be considered. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Macular Edema: The Current Recommendations for Clinical Practice)
Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 993 KiB  
Article
Dysregulated Tear Film Proteins in Macular Edema Due to the Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration Are Involved in the Regulation of Protein Clearance, Inflammation, and Neovascularization
by Mateusz Winiarczyk, Dagmara Winiarczyk, Katarzyna Michalak, Kai Kaarniranta, Łukasz Adaszek, Stanisław Winiarczyk and Jerzy Mackiewicz
J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10(14), 3060; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10143060 - 10 Jul 2021
Cited by 9 | Viewed by 1899
Abstract
Macular edema and its further complications due to the leakage from the choroidal neovascularization in course of the age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a leading cause of blindness among elderly individuals in developed countries. Changes in tear film proteomic composition have been reported [...] Read more.
Macular edema and its further complications due to the leakage from the choroidal neovascularization in course of the age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a leading cause of blindness among elderly individuals in developed countries. Changes in tear film proteomic composition have been reported to occur in various ophthalmic and systemic diseases. There is an evidence that the acute form of neovascular AMD may be reflected in the tear film composition. Tear film was collected with Schirmer strips from patients with neovascular AMD and sex- and age-matched control patients. Two-dimensional electrophoresis was performed followed by MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry for identification of differentially expressed proteins. Quantitative analysis of the differential electrophoretic spots was performed with Delta2D software. Altogether, 11 significantly differentially expressed proteins were identified; of those, 8 were downregulated, and 3 were upregulated in the tear film of neovascular AMD patients. The differentially expressed proteins identified in tear film were involved in signaling pathways associated with impaired protein clearance, persistent inflammation, and neovascularization. Tear film protein analysis is a novel way to screen AMD-related biomarkers. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Macular Edema: The Current Recommendations for Clinical Practice)
Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 1817 KiB  
Article
Bleb Compressive Sutures in the Management of Hypotony Maculopathy after Glaucoma Surgery
by Ewa Kosior-Jarecka, Dominika Wróbel-Dudzińska, Anna Święch and Tomasz Żarnowski
J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10(11), 2223; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10112223 - 21 May 2021
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1894
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to assess the efficacy and safety of compressive sutures in patients with hypotony maculopathy after glaucoma surgery. METHODS: This retrospective case series analyzes the clinical outcomes of conjunctival compressive sutures in 17 patients with hypotony maculopathy [...] Read more.
PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to assess the efficacy and safety of compressive sutures in patients with hypotony maculopathy after glaucoma surgery. METHODS: This retrospective case series analyzes the clinical outcomes of conjunctival compressive sutures in 17 patients with hypotony maculopathy developed after glaucoma surgery. Compressive Nylon 10–0 single sutures were used in all patients; in two patients, the procedure was repeated. All patients underwent ophthalmic evaluation and macular OCT scanning before the surgery, one month, six months, and one year after the procedure. RESULTS: Mean intraocular pressure (IOP) before suturing was 2.3 ± 1.57 mmHg and increased to 14.2 ± 7.03 mmHg (p = 0.00065) one month after the procedure. After six months, mean IOP was 10.2 ± 4.3 mmHg (p = 0.005), and after one year ± 4.7 mmHg (p = 0.0117). To obtain the target pressure, the sutures had to be removed in one patient, and medical therapy was undertaken in three patients. Mean decimal best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) before the sutures was 0.18 ± 0.13 and increased to 0.53 ± 0.25 (p = 0.0004) after one month, to 0.46 ± 0.31 (p = 0.005) after six months, and to 0.31 ± 0.22 (p = 0.025) after one year. In one case, leakage from the bleb was observed after the procedure and bleb revision was required. CONCLUSIONS: transconjuctival compressive sutures seem to be an efficient and safe technique for managing hypotony maculopathy after glaucoma surgery. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Macular Edema: The Current Recommendations for Clinical Practice)
Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 6316 KiB  
Article
Idiopathic Peripheral Retinal Telangiectasia in Adults: A Case Series and Literature Review
by Maciej Gawęcki
J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10(8), 1767; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10081767 - 19 Apr 2021
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 4436
Abstract
Idiopathic peripheral retinal telangiectasia (IPT), often termed as Coats disease, can present in a milder form with the onset in adulthood. The goal of this case series study and literature review was to describe and classify different presenting forms and treatment of this [...] Read more.
Idiopathic peripheral retinal telangiectasia (IPT), often termed as Coats disease, can present in a milder form with the onset in adulthood. The goal of this case series study and literature review was to describe and classify different presenting forms and treatment of this entity and to review contemporary methods of its management. Six cases of adult onset IPT were described with the following phenotypes based on fundus ophthalmoscopy, fluorescein angiography, and optical coherence tomography findings: IPT without exudates or foveal involvement, IPT with peripheral exudates without foveal involvement, IPT with peripheral exudates and cystoid macular edema, and IPT with peripheral and macular hard exudates. Treatments applied in this series included observation, laser photocoagulation, and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment with variable outcomes depending upon the extent of IPT, the aggressiveness of laser treatment, and the stringency of follow-up. The accompanying literature review suggests that ablative therapies, especially laser photocoagulation, remain the most effective treatment option in adult-onset IPT, with anti-VEGF therapy serving as an adjuvant procedure. Close follow-up is necessary to achieve and maintain reasonable good visual and morphological results. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Macular Edema: The Current Recommendations for Clinical Practice)
Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 1795 KiB  
Article
Imbalance in the Levels of Angiogenic Factors in Patients with Acute and Chronic Central Serous Chorioretinopathy
by Izabella Karska-Basta, Weronika Pociej-Marciak, Michał Chrząszcz, Agnieszka Kubicka-Trząska, Magdalena Dębicka-Kumela, Maciej Gawęcki, Bożena Romanowska-Dixon and Marek Sanak
J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10(5), 1087; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10051087 - 05 Mar 2021
Cited by 12 | Viewed by 1920
Abstract
Background: The pathogenesis of central serous chorioretinopathy (CSC) remains a subject of intensive research. We aimed to determine correlations between plasma levels of selected angiogenic factors and different forms of CSC. Methods: Eighty patients were enrolled in the study including 30 with a [...] Read more.
Background: The pathogenesis of central serous chorioretinopathy (CSC) remains a subject of intensive research. We aimed to determine correlations between plasma levels of selected angiogenic factors and different forms of CSC. Methods: Eighty patients were enrolled in the study including 30 with a chronic form of CSC, 30 with acute CSC, and 20 controls. Presence of active CSC was determined by fluorescein angiography (FA), indocyanine green angiography (ICGA), and swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT). Plasma concentrations of angiopoietin-1, endostatin, fibroblast growth factor, placental growth factor (PlGF), platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF-AA), thrombospondin-2, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), VEGF-D, and pigment epithelium–derived factor were measured, and the results were compared between groups. Additionally, mean choroidal thickness (CT) was measured in all patients. Results: Levels of angiopoietin-1 (p = 0.008), PlGF (p = 0.045), and PDGF-AA (p = 0.033) differed significantly between the three groups. Compared with the controls, VEGF (p = 0.024), PlGF (p = 0.013), and PDGF-AA (p = 0.012) were downregulated in the whole CSC group, specifically PDGF-AA (p = 0.002) in acute CSC and angiopoietin-1 (p = 0.007) in chronic CSC. An inverse correlation between mean CT and VEGF levels was noted in CSC patients (rho = −0.27, p = 0.044). Conclusions: Downregulated angiopoietin-1, VEGF, PDGF-AA, and PlGF levels may highlight the previously unknown role of the imbalanced levels of proangiogenic and antiangiogenic factors in the pathogenesis of CSC. Moreover, downregulated VEGF levels may suggest that choroidal neovascularization in CSC is associated with arteriogenesis rather than angiogenesis. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Macular Edema: The Current Recommendations for Clinical Practice)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

16 pages, 329 KiB  
Review
Treatment of Macular Edema in Vascular Retinal Diseases: A 2021 Update
by Andrzej Grzybowski, Agne Markeviciute and Reda Zemaitiene
J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10(22), 5300; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10225300 - 15 Nov 2021
Cited by 17 | Viewed by 2748
Abstract
Macular edema (ME) is associated with various conditions; however, the main causes of ME are retinal vein occlusion (RVO) and diabetes. Laser photocoagulation, formerly the gold standard for the treatment of ME, has been replaced by anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) intravitreal injections. [...] Read more.
Macular edema (ME) is associated with various conditions; however, the main causes of ME are retinal vein occlusion (RVO) and diabetes. Laser photocoagulation, formerly the gold standard for the treatment of ME, has been replaced by anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) intravitreal injections. Despite its efficiency, this treatment requires frequent injections to preserve the outcomes of anti-VEGF therapy, and as many patients do not sufficiently respond to the treatment, ME is typically a chronic condition that can lead to permanent visual impairment. Generalized recommendations for the treatment of ME are lacking, which highlights the importance of reviewing treatment approaches, including recent anti-VEGFs, intravitreal steroid implants, and subthreshold micropulse lasers. We reviewed relevant studies, emphasizing the articles published between 2019 and 2021 and using the following keywords: macular edema, diabetic macular edema, retinal vein occlusion, laser photocoagulation, anti-VEGF, and intravitreal injections. Our results revealed that a combination of different treatment methods may be beneficial in resistant cases. Additionally, artificial intelligence (AI) is likely to help select the best treatment option for patients in the near future. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Macular Edema: The Current Recommendations for Clinical Practice)
14 pages, 287 KiB  
Review
Current Management Options in Irvine–Gass Syndrome: A Systemized Review
by Michał Orski and Maciej Gawęcki
J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10(19), 4375; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10194375 - 25 Sep 2021
Cited by 11 | Viewed by 3391
Abstract
Irvine–Gass syndrome (IGS) remains one of the most common complications following uneventful cataract surgery. In most cases, macular edema (ME) in IGS is benign, self-limiting, and resolves spontaneously without visual impairment; however, persistent edema and refractory cases may occur and potentially deteriorate visual [...] Read more.
Irvine–Gass syndrome (IGS) remains one of the most common complications following uneventful cataract surgery. In most cases, macular edema (ME) in IGS is benign, self-limiting, and resolves spontaneously without visual impairment; however, persistent edema and refractory cases may occur and potentially deteriorate visual function. Despite the relatively high prevalence of IGS, no solid management guidelines exist. We searched the PUBMED database for randomized clinical trials (RCT) or case series of at least 10 cases published since 2000 evaluating different treatment strategies in patients with cystoid macular edema (CME). The search revealed 28 papers that fulfilled the inclusion criteria with only seven RCTs. The scarceness of material makes it impossible to formulate strong recommendations for the treatment of IGS. Clinical practice and theoretical background support topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) as the first-line therapy. Invasive procedures, such as periocular steroids, intravitreal corticosteroids, and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF), are usually applied in prolonged or refractory cases. Results of novel applications of subthreshold micropulse laser (SML) are also promising and should be studied carefully in terms of the safety profile and cost effectiveness. Early initiation of invasive treatment for providing better functional results must be examined in further research. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Macular Edema: The Current Recommendations for Clinical Practice)
14 pages, 271 KiB  
Review
Update on the Management of Uveitic Macular Edema
by Slawomir Jan Teper
J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10(18), 4133; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10184133 - 14 Sep 2021
Cited by 9 | Viewed by 2454
Abstract
Uveitic macular edema (ME) is a frequent complication in 8.3% of uveitis patients and is a leading cause of serious visual impairment in about 40% of cases. Despite the numerous available drugs for its treatment, at least a third of patients fail to [...] Read more.
Uveitic macular edema (ME) is a frequent complication in 8.3% of uveitis patients and is a leading cause of serious visual impairment in about 40% of cases. Despite the numerous available drugs for its treatment, at least a third of patients fail to achieve satisfactory improvement in visual acuity. First-line drugs are steroids administered by various routes, but drug intolerance or ineffectiveness occur frequently, requiring the addition of other groups of therapeutic drugs. Immunomodulatory and biological drugs can have positive effects on inflammation and often on the accompanying ME, but most uveitic randomized clinical trials to date have not aimed to reduce ME; hence, there is no clear scientific evidence of their effectiveness in this regard. Before starting therapy to reduce general or local immunity, infectious causes of inflammation should be ruled out. This paper discusses local and systemic drugs, including steroids, biological drugs, immunomodulators, VEGF inhibitors, and anti-infection medication. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Macular Edema: The Current Recommendations for Clinical Practice)
7 pages, 222 KiB  
Review
Subthreshold Diode Micropulse Laser Combined with Intravitreal Therapy for Macular Edema—A Systematized Review and Critical Approach
by Maciej Gawęcki
J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10(7), 1394; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10071394 - 31 Mar 2021
Cited by 16 | Viewed by 1694
Abstract
Objective: intravitreal therapy for macular edema (ME) is a common clinical approach to treating most retinal vascular diseases; however, it generates high costs and requires multiple follow-up visits. Combining intravitreal anti–vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) or steroid therapy with subthreshold diode micropulse laser [...] Read more.
Objective: intravitreal therapy for macular edema (ME) is a common clinical approach to treating most retinal vascular diseases; however, it generates high costs and requires multiple follow-up visits. Combining intravitreal anti–vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) or steroid therapy with subthreshold diode micropulse laser (SDM) application could potentially reduce the burden of numerous intravitreal injections. This review sought to explore whether this combination treatment is effective in the course of ME secondary to retinal vascular disease, and in particular, determine whether it is comparable or superior to intravitreal therapy alone. Materials and methods: the following terms and Boolean operators were used to search the PubMed literature database: subthreshold micropulse laser, subthreshold diode micropulse OR micropulse laser treatment AND anti-VEGF, anti-VEGF treatment, intravitreal steroids, OR combined therapy.This analysis included all studies discussing the combination of SDM and intravitreal anti-VEGF or steroid treatment. Results: the search revealed nine studies that met the inclusion criteria, including five comparing combined treatment and anti-VEGF treatment alone, four covering diabetic ME, and one covering ME secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion. All of these five studies suggested that combination therapy results in fewer intravitreal injections than anti-VEGF monotherapy with non-inferior functional and morphological outcomes. The remaining four studies report functional and morphological improvements after combined treatment; however, SDM alone was never superior to intravitreal-alone or combined treatment. There were substantial differences in treatment protocols and inclusion criteria between the studies. Conclusions: the available material was too scarce to provide a reliable assessment of the effects of combined therapy and its relation to intravitreal monotherapy in the treatment of ME secondary to retinal vascular disease. One assumption of note is that it is possible that SDM plus anti-VEGF might require fewer intravitreal injections than anti-VEGF monotherapy with equally good functional and morphological results. However, further randomized research is required to confirm this thesis. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Macular Edema: The Current Recommendations for Clinical Practice)
Back to TopTop