Long Intervals between Intravitreal Injections Using a Treat-and-Extend Protocol in a Real-Life Context in AMD: The LIRE Study.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to assess the outcome of long treat-and-extend (TE) anti-VEGF intravitreal injection (IVI) intervals (≥every 12 weeks [Q12W]) in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). The aims of this retrospective study were to determine the proportion of nAMD eyes treated ≥ Q12W, to analyze their longitudinal, functional, and anatomical outcomes, and to compare functional and anatomical outcomes between eyes that rapidly versus slowly reached a Q12W regimen and between eyes directly treated with versus initiating lately the TE regimen. METHODS: All patients receiving IVIs for nAMD were screened. The longitudinal, functional, and anatomical characteristics of Q12W-treated eyes were reported at different timepoints. RESULTS: Ninety-one eyes were included (38% of our total nAMD cohort). The mean TE regimen time to reach a Q12W interval was 20.1 ± 16.2 months. During this time, a mean number of 12.1 ± 9.3 IVIs were needed. The mean best-corrected visual acuity was 68 letters at the time of diagnosis and was maintained (p > 0.05). Eyes that rapidly reached a Q12W interval had a shorter follow-up before TE regimen initiation (p = 0.04) and received fewer IVIs (p = 0.02) than eyes that slowly reached a Q12W interval. Eyes directly treated with the TE regimen reached a Q12W interval more rapidly than eyes with late TE initiation. The neovascularization subtype was not a predictor of outcome in TE-treated eyes. CONCLUSION: ≥Q12W eyes represent an important part of the nAMD population in our real-life study. No baseline anatomical characteristics were associated with the outcome under a TE regimen, although early TE regimen initiation allowed extending more rapidly the IVI interval.

A prospective multicentre study of intravitreal injections and ocular surface in 219 patients: IVIS study.

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of intravitreal injections (IVTI) on ocular surface of patients treated with multiple injections. METHODS: Prospective, tricentric study conducted in patients treated with unilateral IVTI. An asepsis protocol with povidone-iodine was used for all patients during IVTI. The primary endpoint was the difference between the pre-IVTI Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI 1) score and that measured on day one (D1) post-IVTI (OSDI 2). Secondary endpoints were the evaluation of predictive factors for OSDI scores, pain assessment on D1, and the Lacrydiag® analysis of tears from the injected eye versus contralateral eye before IVTI. RESULTS: Two hundred and nineteen patients with a mean age of 75.9 ± 10 years were included. The mean OSDI2-OSDI1 difference was 19.2 ± 20.6 (p < 0.001). The mean noninvasive tear break-up time was 6.41 ± 4.59 seconds in the injected eye versus 7.36 ± 4.36 seconds in the contralateral eye (p < 0.001). In the multivariate analysis, the factors significantly associated with the OSDI 2 score were the OSDI 1 score (p < 0.001), the pain score on D1 (p < 0.001) the number of instilled glaucoma eye drop (p = 0.01) and a centre effect (centres 2 and 3 versus centre 1, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our results confirm the impairment of the ocular surface and quality of life immediately after an IVTI. These results suggest 3 levels of action to improve the immediate tolerance: improving the basal status of the ocular surface, reducing the contact time with povidone-iodine that might be toxic to the surface, and improving immediate post-IVTI treatment.