25th RCOphth Congress, President's Session paper:25 years of progress in medical retina

The quarter century since the foundation of the Royal College of Ophthalmologists has coincided with immense change in the subspecialty of medical retina, which has moved from being the province of a few dedicated enthusiasts to being an integral, core part of ophthalmology in every eye department. In age-related macular degeneration, there has been a move away from targeted, destructive laser therapy, dependent on fluorescein angiography to intravitreal injection therapy of anti-growth factor agents, largely guided by optical coherence tomography. As a result of these changes, ophthalmologists have witnessed a marked improvement in visual outcomes for their patients with wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD), while at the same time developing and enacting entirely novel ways of delivering care. In the field of diabetic retinopathy, this period also saw advances in laser technology and a move away from highly destructive laser photocoagulation treatment to gentler retinal laser treatments. The introduction of intravitreal therapies, both steroids and anti-growth factor agents, has further advanced the treatment of diabetic macular oedema. This era has also seen in the United Kingdom the introduction of a coordinated national diabetic retinopathy screening programme, which offers an increasing hope that the burden of blindness from diabetic eye disease can be lessened. Exciting future advances in retinal imaging, genetics, and pharmacology will allow us to further improve outcomes for our patients and for ophthalmologists specialising in medical retina, the future looks very exciting but increasingly busy.

Defining response to anti-VEGF therapies in neovascular AMD

The introduction of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) has made significant impact on the reduction of the visual loss due to neovascular age-related macular degeneration (n-AMD). There are significant inter-individual differences in response to an anti-VEGF agent, made more complex by the availability of multiple anti-VEGF agents with different molecular configurations. The response to anti-VEGF therapy have been found to be dependent on a variety of factors including patient’s age, lesion characteristics, lesion duration, baseline visual acuity (VA) and the presence of particular genotype risk alleles. Furthermore, a proportion of eyes with n-AMD show a decline in acuity or morphology, despite therapy or require very frequent re-treatment. There is currently no consensus as to how to classify optimal response, or lack of it, with these therapies. There is, in particular, confusion over terms such as ‘responder status’ after treatment for n-AMD, ‘tachyphylaxis’ and ‘recalcitrant’ n-AMD. This document aims to provide a consensus on definition/categorisation of the response of n-AMD to anti-VEGF therapies and on the time points at which response to treatment should be determined. Primary response is best determined at 1 month following the last initiation dose, while maintained treatment (secondary) response is determined any time after the 4th visit. In a particular eye, secondary responses do not mirror and cannot be predicted from that in the primary phase. Morphological and functional responses to anti-VEGF treatments, do not necessarily correlate, and may be dissociated in an individual eye. Furthermore, there is a ceiling effect that can negate the currently used functional metrics such as >5 letters improvement when the baseline VA is good (ETDRS>70 letters). It is therefore important to use a combination of both the parameters in determining the response.The following are proposed definitions: optimal (good) response is defined as when there is resolution of fluid (intraretinal fluid; IRF, subretinal fluid; SRF and retinal thickening), and/or improvement of >5 letters, subject to the ceiling effect of good starting VA. Poor response is defined as <25% reduction from the baseline in the central retinal thickness (CRT), with persistent or new IRF, SRF or minimal or change in VA (that is, change in VA of 0+4 letters). Non-response is defined as an increase in fluid (IRF, SRF and CRT), or increasing haemorrhage compared with the baseline and/or loss of >5 letters compared with the baseline or best corrected vision subsequently. Poor or non-response to anti-VEGF may be due to clinical factors including suboptimal dosing than that required by a particular patient, increased dosing intervals, treatment initiation when disease is already at an advanced or chronic stage), cellular mechanisms, lesion type, genetic variation and potential tachyphylaxis); non-clinical factors including poor access to clinics or delayed appointments may also result in poor treatment outcomes. In eyes classified as good responders, treatment should be continued with the same agent when disease activity is present or reactivation occurs following temporary dose holding. In eyes that show partial response, treatment may be continued, although re-evaluation with further imaging may be required to exclude confounding factors. Where there is persistent, unchanging accumulated fluid following three consecutive injections at monthly intervals, treatment may be withheld temporarily, but recommenced with the same or alternative anti-VEGF if the fluid subsequently increases (lesion considered active). Poor or non-response to anti-VEGF treatments requires re-evaluation of diagnosis and if necessary switch to alternative therapies including other anti-VEGF agents and/or with photodynamic therapy (PDT). Idiopathic polypoidal choroidopathy may require treatment with PDT monotherapy or combination with anti-VEGF. A committee comprised of retinal specialists with experience of managing patients with n-AMD similar to that which developed the Royal College of Ophthalmologists Guidelines to Ranibizumab was assembled. Individual aspects of the guidelines were proposed by the committee lead (WMA) based on relevant reference to published evidence base following a search of Medline and circulated to all committee members for discussion before approval or modification. Each draft was modified according to feedback from committee members until unanimous approval was obtained in the final draft. A system for categorising the range of responsiveness of n-AMD lesions to anti-VEGF therapy is proposed. The proposal is based primarily on morphological criteria but functional criteria have been included. Recommendations have been made on when to consider discontinuation of therapy either because of success or futility. These guidelines should help clinical decision-making and may prevent over and/or undertreatment with anti-VEGF therapy.

Is it safe to increase diabetic retinopathy screening intervals in patients with no/background diabetic retinopathy?

Patients who present with background DR should continue to be screened annually as a high prportion of these patients develop sight threatening DR (12%). A low prportion of patients with no DR at baseline were referred for STDR (1.3%). Out of the 51 patients in this category referred only 1 required laser. The authors suggest that patients graded R0M0 could be screened biannually.

Optic Disc Haemorrhage (ODH) audit:should morphology determine referral?

A retrospective analysis of 77 patients who presented with ODH at DR screening in the Birmingham And Black Country Screening Programme between June 2009 -March 2010. Of 77 detected, 34 were referred with possible glaucoma and this was confirmed in 11 cases (26%) of those referred. The complete results suggest that ODH is a high indicayor for glaucoma but that differing morphology of ODH is not a major predictor.

Editorial

Full text: Welcome to issue 1 of 2012 and a belated Happy New Year to all CLAE readers and BCLA members. The hardest job I had for this issue was to decide which papers to include and which papers to hang on to and save for issue 2 of 2012. At the end of December when I was choosing the content for this issue there were additional 5 papers that could have been included. The final choice came down to various factors; such as first come first served – i.e. which papers had been ready and waiting the longest; secondly which papers had been submitted the earliest; are there similar papers so that it may be beneficial to publish them alongside this paper; and also was the content something which needed to be out there quicker than other papers as it was a current hot topic? But it should be noted that once papers are proofed and deemed ready by authors they are published in the epub version and put online for others to see in their final version. An epub version is given a DOI number (digital object identifier) so that it can be cited by other authors. Apart from being on line the only other difference is that an epub version is essentially waiting to be assigned to a particular issue. So those papers that are being held off for issue 2 of this year are actually already available for you to read (and cite) on line. In this issue there is a paper related to the cost of different contact lens replacement schedules – this may be a topic that is debated more in the future since as a society we are thinking more ‘green’ and all trying to help by reducing our carbon footprint, whether that be by recycling or using less in the first place. A timely review paper on the management of allergic eye disease may help us to better manage those patients we see in the spring with pollen allergies. We have two papers looking at different aspects in keratoconus patients, another looking at a modified fluoret strip and its application in measuring tear break up time and a review paper on corneal erosions. Another interesting paper comes from Professor Harminder Dua and his team. Professor Dua is the UK Royal College of Ophthalmologists’ president and has been interested in corneal anatomy and physiology for much of his research career. Finally, an unusual case of an ocular injury related to a snake bite. Overall I would say there is enough to sink your ‘fangs’ into! Finally, it gives me great pleasure in announcing the newest person to join our Editorial Board, Dr Florence Malet. Dr Malet is an Ophthalmologist and since September 2000 she has been at the Bordeaux Hospital in France developing the Contact Lens Unit of in the Ophthalmology University Department. She is ex-president of the French Contact Lens Society and president of the European Contact Lens Society of Ophthalmologists.

Medical management of diabetic retinopathy:fenofibrate and ACCORD eye studies

The approach of all ophthalmologists, diabetologists and general practitioners seeing patients with diabetic retinopathy should be that good control of blood glucose, blood pressure and plasma lipids are all essential components of modern medical management. The more recent data on the use of fenofibrate in the Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) and The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) Eye studies is reviewed. In FIELD, fenofibrate (200 mg/day) reduced the requirements for laser therapy and prevented disease progression in patients with pre-existing diabetic retinopathy. In ACCORD Eye, fenofibrate (160 mg daily) with simvastatin resulted in a 40% reduction in the odds of retinopathy progressing over 4 years, compared with simvastatin alone. This occurred with an increase in HDL-cholesterol and a decrease in the serum triglyceride level in the fenofibrate group, as compared with the placebo group, and was independent of glycaemic control. We believe fenofibrate is effective in preventing progression of established diabetic retinopathy in type 2 diabetes and should be considered for patients with pre-proliferative diabetic retinopathy and/or diabetic maculopathy, particularly in those with macular oedema requiring laser. © 2011 Macmillan Publishers Limited All rights reserved.

The management of posterior vitreous detachment by an optometrist

Acute posterior vitreous detachment (PVD) is the most common cause of retinal detachment. The management of this condition can be variable and often undue reliance is placed upon associated signs and symptoms which can be a poor indicator of pathology. Optometrists undertake a number of extended roles, however involvement in vitreo-retinal sub-specialities appears to be limited. One objective was to directly compare an optometrist and ophthalmologist in the assessment of patients with PVD, for this a high level of agreement was found (95% sensitivity, 99% specificity, 0.94 kappa). A review of 1107 patients diagnosed with acute PVD that were re-evaluated in a PVD clinic a few weeks later was undertaken to determine whether such reviews are necessary. One-fifth of patients were found to have conditions undiagnosed at the initial assessment, overall 4% of patients had retinal breaks when examined in the PVD clinic and a total of 7% required further intervention. The sensitivity of fundus examination with +90D and 3-mirror lenses was 85-88% for detecting retinal breaks and 7-85% for pigment in the anterior vitreous for the presence of retinal breaks. Therefore patients with acute PVD should be examined by indirect ophthalmoscopy with indentation at the onset of PVD and 4-6 weeks later. The treatment of retinal breaks with laser retinopexy is performed by ophthalmologists with a primary success rate 54-85%. In a pioneering development, an optometrist undertaking this role achieved a comparable primary success rate (79%). Mid-vitreous opacities associated with PVD are described, and noted in 100% of eyes with PVD. The recognition of this sign is important in the diagnosis of PVD and retinal breaks. The importance of diagnostic imaging is also demonstrated, however the timing in relation to onset may be vital.

Excimer laser surface ablation - a review

Corneal surface laser ablation procedures for the correction of refractive error have enjoyed a resurgence of interest, especially in patients with a possible increased risk of complications after lamellar surgery. Improvements in the understanding of corneal biomechanical changes, the modulation of wound healing, laser technology including ablation profiles and different methods for epithelial removal have widened the scope for surface ablation. This article discusses photorefractive keratectomy, trans-epithelial photorefractive keratectomy, laser-assisted sub-epithelial keratomileusis and epithelial-laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis. © 2010 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2010 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists.