Dataset Information

Repeated intravitreal injections of antivascular endothelial growth factors and risk of intraocular pressure medication use.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To determine the risk of initiating ocular hypertension and glaucoma treatment with repeated injections of antivascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGF).

Methods

A unique, retrospective cohort study was performed using a large national US medical claim database. The study population included patients who had 1 or more injections of an anti-VEGF agent. Exclusion occurred for any previous glaucoma, glaucoma suspect, glaucoma-related procedure, an ocular steroid injection, or not seeing an eye care provider at least once in each year of follow-up. Cohorts were divided into quartiles based on the number of injections performed over the follow-up period. Patients were observed for 2 and 3 years. The main outcome measure was defined as any new prescription for an ocular antihypertensive medication with a concurrent diagnosis of glaucoma, glaucoma suspect, or ocular hypertension. Multivariate logistic regression determined the odds of initiating glaucoma treatment in each injection quartile while controlling for numerous covariates. Sensitivity analysis assessed outcomes that included new medication only as well as a new medication plus diagnosis of glaucoma.

Results

In total, 17,113 and 9992 patients met 2- and 3-year observation end points, respectively. The multivariate odds ratio for initiating glaucoma treatment at 2 years was higher in the highest quartile (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.39-2.76, p < 0.001) compared with the lowest. The 3-year comparison had similar results with increased odds in the highest quartile (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.07-2.13, p = 0.006) compared with the lowest. Sensitivity analyses also showed similar results with more injections being associated with initiating treatment (p < 0.053 for all comparisons).

Conclusions

Repeated anti-VEGF injections are associated with an increased odds of initiating treatment for ocular hypertension and glaucoma.

SUBMITTER: Cui QN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6698200 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Repeated intravitreal injections of antivascular endothelial growth factors and risk of intraocular pressure medication use.

Cui Qi N QN Gray Iga N IN Yu Yinxi Y VanderBeek Brian L BL

Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie 20190531 9

<h4>Purpose</h4>To determine the risk of initiating ocular hypertension and glaucoma treatment with repeated injections of antivascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGF).<h4>Methods</h4>A unique, retrospective cohort study was performed using a large national US medical claim database. The study population included patients who had 1 or more injections of an anti-VEGF agent. Exclusion occurred for any previous glaucoma, glaucoma suspect, glaucoma-related procedure, an ocular steroid injecti ...[more]

PMID: 31152311

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeRoutine use of face masks for patients and physicians during intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections has increased with the emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. This study evaluates the impact of universal face mask use on rates and outcomes of post-injection endophthalmitis (PIE).DesignRetrospective, multicenter, comparative cohort study.ParticipantsEyes receiving intravitreal anti-VEGF injections from October 1, 2019, to July 31, 2020, at 12 centers.MethodsCases were divided into a "no face mask" group if no face masks were worn by the physician or patient during intravitreal injections or a "universal face mask" group if face masks were worn by the physician, ancillary staff, and patient during intravitreal injections.Main outcome measuresRate of endophthalmitis, microbial spectrum, and visual acuity (VA).ResultsOf 505 968 intravitreal injections administered in 110 547 eyes, 85 of 294 514 (0.0289%; 1 in 3464 injections) cases of presumed endophthalmitis occurred in the "no face mask" group, and 45 of 211 454 (0.0213%; 1 in 4699) cases occurred in the "universal face mask" group (odds ratio [OR], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51-1.18; P = 0.097). In the "no face mask" group, there were 27 cases (0.0092%; 1 in 10 908 injections) of culture-positive endophthalmitis compared with 9 cases (0.004%; 1 in 23 494) in the "universal face mask" group (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.22-0.99; P = 0.041). Three cases of oral flora-associated endophthalmitis occurred in the "no face mask" group (0.001%; 1 in 98 171 injections) compared with 1 (0.0005%; 1 in 211 454) in the "universal face mask" group (P = 0.645). Patients presented a mean (range) 4.9 (1-30) days after the causative injection, and mean logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) VA at endophthalmitis presentation was 2.04 (~20/2200) for "no face mask" group compared with 1.65 (~20/900) for the "universal face mask" group (P = 0.022), although no difference was observed 3 months after treatment (P = 0.764).ConclusionsIn a large, multicenter, retrospective study, physician and patient face mask use during intravitreal anti-VEGF injections did not alter the risk of presumed acute-onset bacterial endophthalmitis, but there was a reduced rate of culture-positive endophthalmitis. Three months after presentation, there was no difference in VA between the groups.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To estimate the costs and healthcare resources of patients with diabetic macular oedema (DME) who received intravitreal antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents or a dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX-implant) in Korea. DESIGN:Retrospective cohort study. SETTING:The Korean National Health Insurance claim data from 1 January 2015 to 30 June 2017 were retrieved from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service. PARTICIPANTS:Adult patients with DME who were diagnosed with diabetic retinopathy or DME and received ranibizumab, aflibercept or a DEX-implant in conjunction with intravitreal injection were included. Patients whose primary diagnoses were age-related macular degeneration or retinal vein occlusion were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Healthcare resource utilisation and costs related to DME in the 12-month postindex period. RESULTS:During the study period, 182 patients and 414 patients were identified in the anti-VEGF and DEX-implant groups, respectively, and there was no significant difference in the demographic characteristics between the two groups. The outpatient eye care-related medical costs were US$3002.33 for the anti-VEGF group vs US$2250.35 for the DEX-implant group (p<0.0001). After adjusting the relevant covariates based on the generalised linear model, the estimated outpatient eye care-related medical costs were 33% higher in the anti-VEGF group than in the DEX-implant group (p<0.0001, 95% CI 22% to 45%). The utilisation pattern of the two groups showed no significant difference except for the number of intravitreal injections, which was higher in the anti-VEGF group (2.69±2.29) than in the DEX-implant group (2.09±1.37, p<0.001). CONCLUSION:The average annual eye-related medical cost of the DEX-implant group was significantly lower than that of the anti-VEGF group during the study period, which was mainly due to decreased utilisation of eye care-related injections. Further long-term studies are needed.

Dataset Information

Repeated intravitreal injections of antivascular endothelial growth factors and risk of intraocular pressure medication use.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Repeated intravitreal injections of antivascular endothelial growth factors and risk of intraocular pressure medication use.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets