Incidence of severe rise in intraocular pressure after intravitreous injection of aflibercept with prefilled syringes.

Our aim was to analyze the intraocular pressure (IOP) changes following different intravitreous injection (IVI) procedures with or without prefilled syringes (PFS) and to elaborate their possible causes. Clinical study and laboratory assessment. 173 eyes of 141 patients. The IOP was prospectively measured pre- and postoperatively in three groups of patients receiving IVI either with ranibizumab (RP), aflibercept PFS (AP) or aflibercept vials (AV). The AP emptying volume (EV) was assessed using 40 aflibercept PFS vials: the plunger was aligned precisely (normal volume, NV) or right below the indication line (high volume, HV) and the drug was ejected with (wP) or without forced pressure (nP). Primary outcome was post-treatment IOP with type of IVI and pre-treatment IOP as fixed factors. Secondary outcome was identification of possibly confounding factors (age, sex, pathology, presence of pseudophakia, spherical error, and number of injections) and IOP > 30 mmHg post-treatment. An IOP rise above 30 mmHg was observed in 8/38 (22%), 16/51 (31%) and 35/86 (41%) cases in the RP, AV and AP groups, respectively (p = 0.129). Pre-treatment IOP was the only predictive variable for IOP rise (p < 0.001). The EV values in the NVnP, NVwP, HVnP and HVwP groups were 56.06 ± 10.32, 70.69 ± 4.56, 74.22 ± 7.41 and 81.63 ± 3.67 µl, respectively (p < 0.001). We observed a marked, although not significantly higher incidence of IOP elevations with the aflibercept PFS. One possible reason may be the error-proneness of administering the correct volume with the AP. Caution should be taken when using the aflibercept PFS in order to prevent potential optic nerve damage in cases with marked elevation in IOP.

Biologics in the Treatment of Uveitis. / Therapie der Uveitis mit Biologika.

GOAL: To provide an overview of biologics that are used to treat noninfectious uveitis, including their different targets, modes of actions, and indications. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A review of recent and well-established literature was used to present the biochemical and pathophysiological background of biologics and to provide an account of evidence-based decision making for their use, not only in noninfectious uveitis in general, but with special regard to indications for their use in particular types of uveitis. RESULTS: Extensive clinical data for adalimumab shows that it is currently the only approved biologic for the treatment of uveitis. However, there is sufficient evidence to argue that many other biologics, notably TNF-α inhibitors, certain Interleukin inhibitors, Interferons, and B cell and T cell inhibitors, are also suitable for use in uveitis. CONCLUSIONS: Biologics have revolutionized the treatment of noninfectious uveitis and are now considered indispensable. They are used in cases of insufficient response to or intolerance of conventional immunosuppressive agents. However, they can also be indicated as a first-line therapy for certain types of uveitis (e.g., Behçet's disease). TNF-α inhibitors are the most commonly used biologics in the treatment of uveitis.

Retinal Manifestation of an Epstein-Barr Virus-Associated Plasma Cell Neoplasm.

We report a case of an uncommon presentation of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-associated plasma cell neoplasm in a patient with a history of prostate cancer and hairy cell leukemia (HCL) in remission after chemotherapy. The diagnosis of an EBV-associated plasma cell neoplasm was challenging as initially the findings were also compatible with a recurrence of HCL. We highlight the value of diagnostic vitrectomy to achieve the diagnosis. Our particular case demonstrates the importance of diagnostic pars plana vitrectomy and aqueous analyses in patients with uveitis of an unknown cause to confirm the diagnosis.