Risk factors for failing sub-Tenon's triamcinolone acetonide for uveitic macular edema.

IF 2.9 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Amit K Reddy, Jennifer L Patnaik, Alan G Palestine
{"title":"Risk factors for failing sub-Tenon's triamcinolone acetonide for uveitic macular edema.","authors":"Amit K Reddy, Jennifer L Patnaik, Alan G Palestine","doi":"10.1186/s12348-024-00386-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Sub-Tenon's triamcinolone acetonide (STA) is less effective than intravitreal corticosteroids in the treatment of uveitic macular edema (ME), but does have some relative advantages, including substantially lower cost and decreased risk of post-injection ocular hypertension. It would be useful for clinicians to know which eyes may respond well to STA and not necessarily require intravitreal therapy. The objective of this study is to identify risk factors for failing STA for the treatment of uveitic ME.</p><p><strong>Main body: </strong>A retrospective cohort study was performed. Medical records were reviewed of patients who underwent STA for the treatment of uveitic ME between January 1, 2013, and July 31, 2022, at the University of Colorado Hospital. Uveitic ME was defined by a central subfield thickness (CST) greater than 320 μm or the presence of intra-retinal cystoid spaces on optical coherence tomography (OCT), or by the presence of petaloid macular leakage on fluorescein angiography (FA). Data collected included age, race/ethnicity, sex, history of diabetes mellitus, anatomic classification of uveitis, use of corticosteroids, use of immunomodulatory therapy, presence of intra-retinal fluid on OCT, CST on OCT, and presence of petaloid macular leakage on FA. STA failure was defined as the need for additional therapy within 12 weeks of STA due to persistent or worsening uveitic ME. One hundred eighty eyes from 131 patients were included. Forty-two eyes (23.3%) were considered treatment failures. In univariate and multivariable analysis, higher baseline CST was associated with a higher likelihood of failing STA (OR 1.17 for each 30 μm increase in CST, P = 0.016).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>STA, while not as potent as intravitreal corticosteroids for the treatment of uveitic ME, was still an effective therapy, particularly for patients with lower baseline CST. Given its lower side effect profile and cost compared to intravitreal treatments, clinicians could consider STA as an initial treatment for mild uveitic ME.</p>","PeriodicalId":16600,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Ophthalmic Inflammation and Infection","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10830941/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Ophthalmic Inflammation and Infection","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12348-024-00386-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Sub-Tenon's triamcinolone acetonide (STA) is less effective than intravitreal corticosteroids in the treatment of uveitic macular edema (ME), but does have some relative advantages, including substantially lower cost and decreased risk of post-injection ocular hypertension. It would be useful for clinicians to know which eyes may respond well to STA and not necessarily require intravitreal therapy. The objective of this study is to identify risk factors for failing STA for the treatment of uveitic ME.

Main body: A retrospective cohort study was performed. Medical records were reviewed of patients who underwent STA for the treatment of uveitic ME between January 1, 2013, and July 31, 2022, at the University of Colorado Hospital. Uveitic ME was defined by a central subfield thickness (CST) greater than 320 μm or the presence of intra-retinal cystoid spaces on optical coherence tomography (OCT), or by the presence of petaloid macular leakage on fluorescein angiography (FA). Data collected included age, race/ethnicity, sex, history of diabetes mellitus, anatomic classification of uveitis, use of corticosteroids, use of immunomodulatory therapy, presence of intra-retinal fluid on OCT, CST on OCT, and presence of petaloid macular leakage on FA. STA failure was defined as the need for additional therapy within 12 weeks of STA due to persistent or worsening uveitic ME. One hundred eighty eyes from 131 patients were included. Forty-two eyes (23.3%) were considered treatment failures. In univariate and multivariable analysis, higher baseline CST was associated with a higher likelihood of failing STA (OR 1.17 for each 30 μm increase in CST, P = 0.016).

Conclusions: STA, while not as potent as intravitreal corticosteroids for the treatment of uveitic ME, was still an effective therapy, particularly for patients with lower baseline CST. Given its lower side effect profile and cost compared to intravitreal treatments, clinicians could consider STA as an initial treatment for mild uveitic ME.

治疗葡萄膜炎性黄斑水肿的天那水下曲安奈德失败的风险因素。
背景:Sub-Tenon's 曲安奈德(STA)治疗葡萄膜炎性黄斑水肿(ME)的效果不如玻璃体内皮质类固醇,但也有一些相对优势,包括成本大大降低和注射后眼压升高的风险降低。对于临床医生来说,了解哪些眼睛可能对 STA 反应良好而不一定需要进行玻璃体内治疗是非常有用的。本研究的目的是确定STA治疗葡萄膜炎ME失败的风险因素:本研究进行了一项回顾性队列研究。研究人员查阅了科罗拉多大学医院在2013年1月1日至2022年7月31日期间接受STA治疗葡萄膜炎ME的患者病历。葡萄膜炎性 ME 的定义是:中央子场厚度 (CST) 大于 320 μm,或光学相干断层扫描 (OCT) 发现视网膜内囊状间隙,或荧光素血管造影 (FA) 发现花瓣状黄斑渗漏。收集的数据包括年龄、种族/民族、性别、糖尿病史、葡萄膜炎的解剖学分类、皮质类固醇的使用情况、免疫调节疗法的使用情况、OCT 上是否存在视网膜内积液、OCT 上是否存在 CST、FA 上是否存在花瓣状黄斑渗漏。STA失败的定义是在STA 12周内因葡萄膜炎ME持续存在或恶化而需要额外治疗。共纳入了 131 名患者的 180 只眼睛。其中 42 只眼睛(23.3%)被视为治疗失败。在单变量和多变量分析中,基线CST越高,STA失败的可能性越大(CST每增加30 μm,OR为1.17,P = 0.016):STA治疗葡萄膜炎性ME的疗效虽不及玻璃体内皮质类固醇,但仍不失为一种有效的疗法,尤其是对于基线CST较低的患者。鉴于STA的副作用和费用低于玻璃体内治疗,临床医生可以考虑将其作为轻度葡萄膜炎ME的初始治疗方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
3.40%
发文量
39
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信