• Craig J Currie, Sarah E Holden, Ellen Berni, and David R Owens.
• a Global Pharmacoepidemiology, Pharmatelligence , Cardiff , UK.
• Curr Med Res Opin. 2017 Oct 1; 33 (sup2): 19-31.

ObjectivesTo compare visual and anatomical outcomes between eyes treated with fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) 190 µg intravitreal implant for clinically significant chronic diabetic macular edema (DME) and fellow eyes not treated with FAc implant using data from the Iluvien Clinical Evidence study in the UK (ICE-UK) study.MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study, data on people attending hospital eye services and treated with the FAc implant between April 1, 2013 and April 15, 2015 were collected. Changes in visual acuity (VA), central foveal thickness (CFT) and intraocular pressure (IOP) were compared between study eyes (intervention) and fellow eyes.ResultsA total of 208 people were selected. Mean age was 68.1 years and 62% were male. Mean change in VA was -0.09 LogMAR units for study eyes and 0.04 LogMAR units for fellow eyes at 12 months post-implant (p < .001). Over the same period, ≥5 letter, ≥10 letter and ≥15 letter improvements in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) score were achieved by more FAc treated eyes than by fellow eyes (41% versus 23%, p < .001; 28% versus 11%, p < .001; and 18% versus 4%, p < .001 at 12 months, respectively). Differences in the mean change in CFT (-113 µm versus -13 µm, p < .001) and IOP (3.2 mmHg versus -0.2 mmHg, p < .001) were also observed between study and fellow eyes at 12 months.ConclusionVisual acuity improved in study eyes over the 12 months following FAc implant and worsened in fellow eyes. Over the same period, study eyes showed a larger improvement in central foveal thickness. Intraocular pressure worsened in study eyes only. Change in visual acuity, central foveal thickness and intraocular pressure between FAc implant and the end of the 12-month follow-up period differed significantly between study and fellow eyes.

24 keywords...

hide…