A model to quantify the influence of treatment patterns and optimize outcomes in nAMD.

Neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) is a progressive retinal disease that often leads to severe and permanent vision loss. Early initiation of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy has been shown to preserve vision in nAMD patients. Concurrently, treatment outcomes in real-world are inferior to those reported in clinical trials. The most likely reasons observed are fewer treatment-intensity in routine clinical practice than in clinical trials. The other possibility could be the delay in starting treatment and the re-treatment interval. Although a negative impact of aforementioned parameters seems obvious, quantitative impact measures remain elusive in a real-world setting due to a lack of an 'optimal treatment' control group. To overcome this shortcoming, we developed, validated, and applied a model to assess and quantify the impact of anti-VEGF administration variables on visual acuity development in a prospective nAMD patient cohort. The model was further applied to probe the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on visual progressions in nAMD patients. The presented model paves the way to systematically explore and evaluate realistic interventions in the current treatment paradigm, that can be adopted in routine clinical care.

Acute macular neuroretinopathy (AMN) following COVID-19 vaccination.

PURPOSE: To describe a case of acute macular neuroretinopathy (AMN) in a 23-year-old Caucasian female after a COVID-19 vaccination (Vaxzevira). OBSERVATIONS: Our patient perceived visual symptoms in both eyes one day after COVID-19 vaccination. Hyporeflective petalloid shaped perifoveal lesions appeared in infrared reflectance (IR) imaging, and Spectral domain-optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) revealed structural alterations of outer retinal layers that resulted in persistent disruption of the ellipsoid zone (EZ) and the interdigitation zone (IZ). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPORTANCE: We report a novel association between AMN and COVID-19 vaccination. In addition to a febrile infection and oral contraception, previous vaccination should also be considered a potential risk factor for AMN.

Impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on ophthalmic care in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Survey by the commission for cross-sectoral ophthalmology, as a joint commission of the German Ophthalmological Society (DOG) and the Professional Association of German Ophthalmologists (BVA) on the effects of the SARS-CoV­2 pandemic on ophthalmological patient care in Germany. METHODS: Online-based survey. RESULTS: A total of 1190 questionnaires were (partly) answered. With respect to outpatient care and consultations from 15 March to 15 April 2020, a total of 69 (5.8%) participants indicated unlimited, 756 (63.5%) reduced and 330 (27.7%) emergency care only, independent of the type of institution. Outpatient surgery was restricted to emergency surgery in 68% of clinics, 42.0% of inpatient wards, 45.0% of surgical medical care centers and group practices and 33.0% of private practices. Inpatient procedures were limited to emergency care in 75.0% of inpatient wards and in 71.0% of clinics. With the exception of endophthalmitis (+8.2%), the number of urgent indications and emergencies declined: retinal detachment (-34.8%), perforating eyeball injuries (-7.3%), acute glaucoma (-17.8%), central retinal artery occlusion and anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (-31.0%), others (-30.9%), penetrating keratoplasty and amniotic membrane transplantation (-59.1%). Institutional or professional policy requirements (76.0%) and appointment cancellation by patients (84.0%) were the most common reasons for limitations in ophthalmic patient care. CONCLUSION: The initial phase of the pandemic was characterized by a massive reduction in non-urgent conservative and surgical treatment that affected all areas of ophthalmology. Due to intensive care capacities required for COVID-19 patients, inpatient treatment was largely restricted to emergencies. Treatment of ophthalmological patients, including ocular emergencies and urgent treatment, was maintained across all sectors with a (considerable) decrease in the number of cases even in these groups.

[Impacts of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on ophthalmic care in Germany]. / Auswirkungen der SARS-CoV-2-Pandemie auf die ophthalmologische Versorgung in Deutschland.

BACKGROUND: Survey by the commission for cross-sectoral ophthalmology, as a joint commission of the German Ophthalmological Society (DOG) and the Professional Association of German Ophthalmologists (BVA) on the effects of the SARS-CoV­2 pandemic on ophthalmological patient care in Germany. METHODS: Online-based survey. RESULTS: A total of 1190 questionnaires were (partly) answered. With respect to outpatient care and consultations from 15 March to 15 April 2020, a total of 69 (5.8%) participants indicated unlimited, 756 (63.5%) reduced and 330 (27.7%) emergency care only, independent of the type of institution. Outpatient surgery was restricted to emergency surgery in 68% of clinics, 42.0% of inpatient wards, 45.0% of surgical medical care centers and group practices and 33.0% of private practices. Inpatient procedures were limited to emergency care in 75.0% of inpatient wards and in 71.0% of clinics. With the exception of endophthalmitis (+8.2%), the number of urgent indications and emergencies declined: retinal detachment (-34.8%), perforating eyeball injuries (-7.3%), acute glaucoma (-17.8%), central retinal artery occlusion and anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (-31.0%), others (-30.9%), penetrating keratoplasty and amniotic membrane transplantation (-59.1%). Institutional or professional policy requirements (76.0%) and appointment cancellation by patients (84.0%) were the most common reasons for limitations in ophthalmic patient care. CONCLUSION: The initial phase of the pandemic was characterized by a massive reduction in non-urgent conservative and surgical treatment that affected all areas of ophthalmology. Due to intensive care capacities required for COVID-19 patients, inpatient treatment was largely restricted to emergencies. Treatment of ophthalmological patients, including ocular emergencies and urgent treatment, was maintained across all sectors with a (considerable) decrease in the number of cases even in these groups.

There is no intraocular affection on a SARS-CoV-2 - Infected ocular surface.

PURPOSE: The presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in anterior chamber fluid and/or the vitreous in patients with SARS-CoV-2 RNA on the ocular surface is unclear. Knowledge about the infectious state of intraocular structures could influence the daily work of ophthalmic surgeons. OBSERVATIONS: We analyzed ocular samples from a patient who had succumbed to COVID-19 pneumonia for the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. We detected viral RNA in the ocular-surface samples on one swab and in one excidate from the conjunctiva. Samples from the anterior chamber and vitreous revealed no SARS-CoV-2 RNA. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 can effectively be inactivated with standard disinfection agents. The now proven absence of SARS-CoV-2 in intraocular fluids could influence how ophthalmic surgeons work. Without having to account for the risk of a contagion via the anterior chamber and/or vitreous body, the surgical staff would require no additional, more elaborate protection.