Objectives to evaluate long-term effectiveness and safety of fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implant used as second-line treatment in patients with persistent diabetic macular edema (DME). Methods retrospective data chart review of 241 pseudophakic eyes of 178 patients treated with FAc from July 2017 to December 2021 in 10 medical retinal units in Italy. The primary endpoint was the change of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) at 2 years. A Student's paired t-test was used. Additional therapies for DME and intraocular pressure (IOP)-related events were also evaluated. Results efficacy of FAc was assessed in a subset of 111 eyes with at least 24 months of follow-up. Mean BCVA increased at 2 years by 5.1 ETDRS letters (95%CI = 2.6-7.5; p < 0.001) while mean CMT decreased by 189 mu m (95% CI 151-227; p < 0.001). Thirty-eight of these eyes (34.2%) needed additional intravitreal treatments, mainly anti-VEGF. Safety was evaluated on the entire cohort of 241 eyes treated with FAc. Overall, 66 eyes (27.4%) required emergent IOP-lowering medications (typically within the first-year post FAc) while 14 eyes (5.8%) underwent trabeculectomy, mostly during the second year of follow-up. Conclusion FAc implant provides a substantial long-term functional and anatomical benefit when used as second-line treatment in eyes with DME. IOP rise can be adequately managed with topical agents although some eyes may require IOP-lowering surgery.

Real-world experience with fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant in patients with diabetic macular edema

Reibaldi, Michele;
2024-01-01

Abstract

Objectives to evaluate long-term effectiveness and safety of fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implant used as second-line treatment in patients with persistent diabetic macular edema (DME). Methods retrospective data chart review of 241 pseudophakic eyes of 178 patients treated with FAc from July 2017 to December 2021 in 10 medical retinal units in Italy. The primary endpoint was the change of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) at 2 years. A Student's paired t-test was used. Additional therapies for DME and intraocular pressure (IOP)-related events were also evaluated. Results efficacy of FAc was assessed in a subset of 111 eyes with at least 24 months of follow-up. Mean BCVA increased at 2 years by 5.1 ETDRS letters (95%CI = 2.6-7.5; p < 0.001) while mean CMT decreased by 189 mu m (95% CI 151-227; p < 0.001). Thirty-eight of these eyes (34.2%) needed additional intravitreal treatments, mainly anti-VEGF. Safety was evaluated on the entire cohort of 241 eyes treated with FAc. Overall, 66 eyes (27.4%) required emergent IOP-lowering medications (typically within the first-year post FAc) while 14 eyes (5.8%) underwent trabeculectomy, mostly during the second year of follow-up. Conclusion FAc implant provides a substantial long-term functional and anatomical benefit when used as second-line treatment in eyes with DME. IOP rise can be adequately managed with topical agents although some eyes may require IOP-lowering surgery.
2024
370
373
Pharmacology < PHARMACOLOGY; diabetic macular edema < RETINA; diabetic retinopathy < RETINA; glaucoma incisional surgery < GLAUCOMA; glaucoma medical therapies < GLAUCOMA; retina - medical therapies < RETINA
Capone, Luigi; Airaghi, Pietro; Aragona, Pasquale; Castellino, Nicolò; Cicinelli, Maria Vittoria; Ciucci, Francesco; Coppola, Michele; Gaetano, Cristiano De; Lattanzio, Rosangela; Lorusso, Massimo; Maceroni, Martina; Malvasi, Maria Elena; Marco, Luisa; Marraffa, Michele; Martini, Gaia; Mastropasqua, Rodolfo; Minnella, Angelo Maria; Nikolopulou, Eleni; Ortisi, Elina; Pacella, Elena; Papa, Vincenzo; Pennesi, Claudio; Reibaldi, Michele; Rizzo, Stanislao; Toto, Lisa; Trombetta, Luigi; Bandello, Francesco
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2318/1963811
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact