Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE: To study the effects of photodynamic therapy using verteporfin in the treatment of patients with subfoveal polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV). METHODS: A retrospective chart review of 16 consecutive patients with subfoveal PCV treated with photodynamic therapy using verteporfin was performed. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients involved was 70.5 years. The mean follow-up time was 12 months. The visual acuity improved in 9 (56.3 %), remained the same in 5 (31.3 %), and decreased in 2 (12.5 %). The mean change in visual acuity was an improvement of 2.38 lines, a difference that was highly significant ( = 0.004). The change in visual acuity was negatively correlated with increasing age. The final visual acuity was positively correlated with initial acuity and negatively correlated with age. These results were confirmed by multiple linear regression. No patient had any lasting complication from the treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Subfoveal PCV has no proven method of treatment. Although the follow-up time and the number of patients in this pilot study were limited, the encouraging results and lack of complications suggest that further study is indicated

This article reviews established and newly developed posterior segment imaging techniques that may be helpful in the diagnosis and management of patients with uveitis. A brief description of various techniques is followed by a discussion of the situations in which these techniques might be useful in assessing the cause of vision loss, and the extent and activity of the inflammatory changes. The last section of the article describes selected uveitis syndromes wherein posterior segment imaging can reveal diagnostically characteristic, and in some instances pathognomonic, findings

PURPOSE: To report the effects of photodynamic therapy using verteporfin in the treatment of patients with subfoveal idiopathic choroidal vascularization (CNV). DESIGN: Interventional case series. METHODS: In a retrospective study, eight eyes of eight consecutive patients aged 55 years or younger with subfoveal idiopathic CNV treated with photodynamic therapy using verteporfin were evaluated. Visual acuity was considered to be improved if the visual angle was halved, while acuity was thought to be worse if the visual angle doubled. RESULTS: The eight patients included three men and five women with a mean (+/- SD) age of 34.6 (+/- 9.7) years (range 25-53 years). The mean follow-up time was 13.5 months. At the end of the follow-up period the visual acuity improved in five eyes (62.5%), remained unchanged in one (12.5%), and decreased in two (25%). The mean acuity improvement was 3.6 lines of Snellen acuity by the end of the follow-up period, a change that was statistically significant (P =.027, Wilcoxon signed-rank test). No patient had any complication from the treatment. CONCLUSIONS: There is no widely accepted method for treating subfoveal idiopathic CNV and all previously investigated methods have had a significant number of serious side effects. Although the follow-up time and the number of patients in this pilot study were limited, the encouraging results and lack of complications suggest that further study is indicated

This study evaluates a single, 45-degree fundus image from a non-mydriatic camera for the triage of subjects at risk for diabetic retinopathy. A complete retinal assessment by a retina specialist was the main comparator for the camera. Inter-observer agreements were calculated for the reading of digital images with different grades of retinopathy. Two hundred eyes of 100 consecutive subjects were evaluated as part of the James Bay diabetic retinopathy screening project; 62% of subjects had no retinopathy, 12% had microaneurysms only, 24% had non-proliferative retinopathy, 5% had clinically significant macular edema (CSME), and 2% had proliferative disease (PDR). The Kappa statistic for two independent observers was 0.85 (p < 0.001) for the identification of retinopathy from the digital images. The sensitivity of the digital camera for the evaluation of any retinopathy was 84.4%, for CSME and/or PDR it was over 90%. The use of a single digital retinal image for the evaluation of diabetic retinopathy was performed with a high degree of inter-observer concordance and a high degree of sensitivity

Objective: Guidelines were developed based on best available scientific data as well as consensus of expert opinion in absence of controlled clinical trial data to: 1) assist ophthalmologists with selection of patients for whom photodynamic therapy with verteporfin, termed 'verteporfin therapy,' should be considered; and 2) offer suggestions regarding treatment, follow-up, and re-treatment. Methods: Consensus from roundtable of retina specialists who either participated in randomized clinical trials evaluating verteporfin therapy or had clinical experience with verteporfin therapy was based on results of these trials and expert opinion. Additional input and advice were received from representatives on behalf of the Macula Society, the Retina Society, and the Vitreous Society, as well as principal investigators of randomized clinical trials evaluating verteporfin therapy. Results: Patient selection criteria included the following: 1) in cases due to age-related macular degeneration (AMD), lesion composition either predominantly classic choroidal neovascularization (CNV) or occult with no classic CNV; 2) CNV location subfoveal or so close to the foveal center that conventional laser photocoagulation treatment almost certainly would extend under the center; 3) lesion etiology from AMD, pathologic myopia, or other causes in which the outcome without treatment is likely to be worse than with treatment; 4) vision at a level where further loss would be recognized as detrimental to the quality of life of the patient. Criteria did not include lesion size, except in cases composed of occult with no classic CNV in AMD in which therapy for lesions >4 Macular Photocoagulation Study (MPS) disc areas usually should be considered only when presenting with lower levels of best-corrected visual acuity. Criteria also did not include patient age, history of systemic arterial hypertension, or prior laser photocoagulation. Therapy should occur ideally within 1 week of the initial fluorescein angiogram on which the clinical decision to treat is based. Patients should return for follow-up at least as often as every 3 months after any initial or subsequent treatment to determine if there is fluorescein leakage from CNV. Re-treatment should be considered as often as every 3 months if fluorescein leakage from CNV is noted at that time. Re-treatment could be deferred if the biomicroscopic and fluorescein angiographic appearance of the lesion is unchanged and shows minimal leakage, especially when there is no subretinal fluid or fluorescein leakage from CNV underlying the center of the foveal avascular zone. Patients should avoid exposure of skin or eyes to direct sunlight or bright indoor light for 48 hours after treatment or until resolution of any swelling or discoloration from extravasation. Conclusion: These recommendations provide guidelines on the role of verteporfin therapy in the management of CNV due to AMD and other causes. Revisions of these guidelines may be required as new data become available. $$:

PURPOSE: To determine if oral hydration decreases the incidence of verteporfin infusion-associated pain and to find out if other factors play a role in predisposing to this undesired complication. METHODS: Nonrandomized clinical trial. We prospectively examined 250 consecutive patients who have been diagnosed with subfoveal choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration and received photodynamic therapy using verteporfin. One hundred twenty-five patients were assigned to receive 500 ml of water orally administered 30 minutes before beginning the verteporfin infusion, and the remaining 125 consecutive patients were used as controls. Historical and clinical factors in these patients were evaluated for their association with the presence of verteporfin infusion-associated pain. RESULTS: Out of 125 patients receiving water before treatment 12 (9.6%) experienced verteporfin infusion-associated pain. Among the 125 patients who did not get hydration before therapy 12(9.6%) experienced verteporfin infusion-associated pain. There was no statistical difference between the incidence of pain in the two groups (P = 1.0). No statistically significant association was evidenced between the presence of pain and participant's baseline characteristics, except for pain on previous administration of verteporfin (P < .001). Out of 250 total patients 24 (9.6%) developed verteporfin infusion-associated pain. Back pain was the most common and occurred in 21 (8.4%) patients, but other sites included leg, groin, chest, buttock, arm, and shoulder pain concurrently or independently. All patients had resolution of their pain, including chest pain, on cessation of the infusion. CONCLUSIONS: Verteporfin infusion-associated pain may be more common than has been previously reported and is not limited to the back area. It appears to be an idiosyncratic reaction to the drug. It does not seem to be prevented by oral hydration before infusion of verteporfin, and no baseline characteristics, other than a history of pain on previous infusion, seem to be predictive of verteporfin infusion-associated pain

OBJECTIVE: To describe a case of a patient with documented genetic mallatia leventinese who developed a classic choroidal neovascular membrane and underwent photodynamic therapy (PDT) with verteporfin (Visudyne; CIBA Vision Corp., Duluth, GA). DESIGN: Interventional case report. INTERVENTION: The patient underwent a complete ophthalmologic evaluation and fluorescein angiography. Photodynamic therapy with verteporfin was performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical and angiographic records were analyzed for evidence of changes in visual acuity, clinically evident subretinal fluid and the extent of fluorescein leakage from choroidal neovascularization (CNV). RESULTS: Three weeks after treatment, a fluorescein angiogram showed closure of the neovascular membrane, no evident subretinal fluid was seen, and visual acuity had improved from 20/60- to 20/40. Nine weeks after the application, fluorescein angiography demonstrated a microscopic hyperfluorescent spot at the site of the previously active CNV at which a small area of shallow subretinal fluid was observed, and visual acuity was 20/50. Thirty-four weeks after PDT, visual acuity was 20/60, subretinal fluid resolved, and fluorescein angiography did not show any further changes. CONCLUSIONS: Photodynamic therapy with verteporfin may be considered as a possible treatment in patients with mallatia leventinese who develop classic CNV

Objetivo: Relatar uma serie de 5 casos de distrofia viteliforme foveomacular de inicio na vida adulta, uma das distrofias padrao da macula, em associacao com o desenvolvimento de buraco macular. Local: Manhattan Eye, Ear & Throat Hospital, New York, NY, USA. Metodos: Relato de uma serie de casos. Resultados: Cinco casos de distrofia viteliforme foveomacular de inicio na vida adulta, uma das distrofias padrao da macula, desenvolveram buraco macular. Todos os 5 casos, ou 7 olhos, evoluiram com perda de visao, e em um olho foi realizada cirurgia para buraco macular e obtido sucesso anatomico (fechamento do buraco). Conclusao: Distrofia viteliforme foveomacular de inicio na vida adulta pode associarse ao desenvolvimento de buraco macular e esta associacao pode resultar em perda de visao.(AU)