Month 60 Imaging Findings and Relationship to Treatment Outcomes following Anti-VEGF Therapy for Macular Edema due to Central or Hemi Retinal Vein Occlusion.

PubMed ID: 38061584

Author(s): Ip MS, Scott IU, VanVeldhuisen PC, Oden NL, Blodi BA; SCORE2 Investigator Group. Month 60 Imaging Findings and Relationship to Treatment Outcomes following Anti-VEGF Therapy for Macular Edema due to Central or Hemi Retinal Vein Occlusion. Am J Ophthalmol. 2023 Dec 5:S0002-9394(23)00492-0. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2023.11.023. Online ahead of print. PMID 38061584

Journal: American Journal Of Ophthalmology, Dec 2023

PURPOSE To evaluate imaging findings from SCORE2 participants through 60 months to: 1) describe the degree of resolution or progression of these variables; 2) correlate changes in these imaging findings to treatment outcomes such as visual acuity and the number of treatments administered.

METHODS SCORE2 participants were followed for up to 60 months. Visual acuity, injection frequency and imaging tests (CFP, OCT and UWFA) were performed throughout this period.

RESULTS Less than 6% of eyes had subretinal fluid at month 60. DRIL was the most likely finding to persist, present in 96% of eyes at baseline and unchanged at 95% at month 60. For ultrawide-field fluorescein angiography, at baseline, there was a mean of 5.0% non-perfusion area (95% CI: 3.3% – 6.8%) in the NETWORC grid with little change to month 60. For the ETDRS grid, at baseline, there was a mean of 2.3% non-perfusion area (95% CI: 0.7% – 3.9%) with little change to month 60. There was no correlation between any of the imaging variables at baseline and change in visual acuity to month 60 or in the number of injections following the variable treatment timeframe (month 12 to month 60).

CONCLUSIONS These analyses provide an anatomic explanation for persistent functional deficits many years following initial treatment. Clinical practice patterns should consider evaluation with these imaging tests to help explain persistent functional deficits in many eyes. Additionally, these 8 baseline imaging variables generally should not be relied on to predict visual acuity or intensity of treatment.