Aims Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor compounds are routinely used for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME). We aim to evaluate for the existence and magnitude of treatment effect on fellow un-injected eyes. Methods A consecutive group of patients with bilateral DME who received unilateral bevacizumab injections was retrospectively evaluated. Data collected included demographics, ophthalmic and systemic findings, and optical coherence tomography (OCT) measurements of macular thickness. Results Thirty-five patients were evaluated. Mean follow-up was 245 days (range: 30–800), and the mean number of bevacizumab injections was 3.6 (range: 1–11). At end of follow-up, the mean (SD) OCT central subfield thickness reduced by 72±112 micron in the injected eye (from 469±139 to 397±120 micron; P=0.001), while in the non-injected eye it reduced by 49±75 micron (from 380±130 to 331±106 micron; P<0.001). Sixteen injected eyes (45.7%) showed central subfield thickness reduction of ≥50 micron while 10 (28.6%) non-injected eyes showed such thickness reduction. Improved VA following treatment was detected in 14 (40%) injected eyes and in 15 (43%) non-injected eyes. Conclusions Unilateral bevacizumab injections in patients with bilateral DME are often associated with bilateral response. Summary Statement Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor compounds are routinely used for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME). In this retrospective study, we show that unilateral bevacizumab injections often result in reduction of the macular thickness in the fellow un-injected eye.

Intravitreal injections (IVI) of anti–vascular endothelial growth factor (anti–VEGF) agents have become the most prevalent intraocular procedure as they represent the major therapeutic modality for prevalent retinal conditions such as age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and diabetic retinopathy. Effective therapy requires adherence to a schedule of iterative IVI as well as routine clinic appointments. The ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in the reduction of attendance at scheduled clinic visits and IVI. In this study, we attempted to analyze the effect of COVID-19 on compliance with anti–VEGF therapy. A total of 636 eyes received injections during a 4-week period of the COVID-19 outbreak in the Retina Clinic. The number of clinic visits for IVI during 1 month from March 15 to April 14 of 2020 was compared to a similar time period in each of the last 4 years. The study demonstrates a decrease in clinic visits for IVI when compared with the same 4-week interval in the four previous years. Based on the trend of the previous 4 years, 10.2% of the year’s total was expected for this time period. Using this model, the 636 reported number of injections for the March–April 2020 period was ~ 5%. This represents a decrease of ~ 50% of the expected IVI for this time period. The COVID-19 outbreak in Israel severely impacted compliance with anti–VEGF treatments.

The aim of this study is to analyze mortality in patients treated with bevacizumab for wet AMD. We conducted a retrospective case-control study between patients who received intravitreal injections of bevacizumab as the sole treatment for exudative AMD between September 2008 and October 2014 (n = 5385) and age and gender matched controls (n = 10,756). All individuals included in the study were reviewed for sociodemographic data and comorbidities. Survival analysis was performed using adjusted Cox regression, using relevant adjusted variables. During follow-up (maximum: 73 months), 1063 (19.7%) individuals after bevacizumab died compared with 1298 (12.1%) in the control group (P < .001). After adjusted Cox survival regression, mortality differed significantly between the groups, Odds ratio = 1.69, (95% C.I. 1.54–1.84), P < .001. We found an increased long-term mortality in individuals with wet AMD treated with bevacizumab compared to a same age and gender group without wet AMD.

Background/Aims: Bevacizumab and ranibizumab are routinely used to treat diabetic macular edema (DME). We aim to evaluate the usefulness of switching to ranibizumab therapy following bevacizumab treatment failure in eyes with DME. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of a consecutive group of patients with DME who received ranibizumab injections following the failure of bevacizumab injections. The injections were delivered following a pro re nata protocol every 4-6 weeks. The data collected included demographics, systemic and ophthalmic findings, as well as the central subfield thickness according to spectral-domain OCT. Results: Eight eyes (5 patients) were included in the study. The median number of bevacizumab injections prior to the switch to ranibizumab was 4, and the median number of ranibizumab injections during the study was 2. The mean follow-up period was 541 ± 258 days. The mean central retinal thickness (CRT) (±SEM) was 539 ± 75 μm before the initiation of bevacizumab treatment, and 524 ± 43 μm after the last bevacizumab injection (p = 0.7). It reduced to 325 ± 26 μm following the ranibizumab injections (p = 0.0063). The best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improved in 4 eyes and remained stable in 4 eyes following the ranibizumab injections. Conclusion: A ranibizumab therapy was effective in reducing the CRT in eyes that failed bevacizumab therapy. A BCVA improvement can also occur in these eyes. Switching between anti-vascular endothelial growth factor compounds may be beneficial in eyes with DME.