J.ophthalmol.(Ukraine).2019;2:14-21.
http://doi.org/10.31288/oftalmolzh201921421
Received: 12 March 2019; Published-online: 24 April 2019
Prevention of macular edema and secondary degeneration of the macula and posterior pole in anterior uveitis
N.V. Konovalova, Dr. Sc. (Med.); N.I.Khramenko, Cand. Sc. (Med.); O.V. Guzun, Cand. Sc. (Med.)
SI “The Filatov Institute of Eye Diseases and Tissue Therapy, NAMS of Ukraine”, Odessa (Ukraine)
E-mail: kvnkonovalova@gmail.com
TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Konovalova NV, Khramenko NI, Guzun OV. Prevention of macular edema and secondary degeneration of the macula and posterior pole in anterior uveitis. J.ophthalmol.(Ukraine).2019;2:14-21. http://doi.org/10.31288/oftalmolzh201921421
Background. Endogenous uveitis is an inflammatory disease of the uvea, making up to 30% in the ophthalmology overall structure according to various authors. Uveitis is among current socially important issues in ophthalmology due to significant incidence rates mainly in people of young and working age; visual impairment and blindness occur in 17.7%-19.2-35% of patients.
Purpose. To improve the treatment efficacy in patients with anterior uveitis using Indocollyre® electrophoresis and Indocollyre® instillations in order to prevent macular edema and secondary degeneration of the macular and the anterior pole.
Material and Methods. Fifty-four patients (54 eyes) with anterior uveitis were followed up. All patients were performed biomicroscopy, ophthalmoscopy, intraocular pressure measurements, perimetry, and ophthalmic rheography using a parameter of pulse volume, the Rheographic Quotient (RQ) (‰) (ReoCom, Ukraine). Optical coherent tomography (OCT) visualized structural changes not only in the sensory retina but in the choroid, which makes it possible to assess the inflammation process in the eye and to early diagnose and to prevent potential complications. Fluorescein angiography (FAG) was performed in order to assess the pigment epithelium, sensory epithelium, and vessels as well as to reveal drusen and the accumulation of lipofuscin in the retina.
Results. OCT findings give the evidence of the presence of macular edema if the retina thickness is increased in the fovea (>240 µm). This is evidenced by the FAG findings and revealed difference in the rheographic quotient value of more than 64% in 21 patients, which made it possible to predict the risk of a dry form of macular dystrophy in these patients. Timely prescription of Indocollyre® electrophoresis and instillations advanced macular edema resolution, which contributed to significant improvement of visual acuity in the iridocyclitis patients, as much as twice, in both groups. The mean treatment course in an acute process was 10±1.8 days.
Conclusion. It is reasonable to use Indocollyre® electrophoresis and instillations to prevent such anterior uveitis complications as macular edema and secondary macular degeneration.
Keywords: anterior uveitis, macular edema, degeneration of the macula and posterior pole, ophthalmic rheography, electrophoresis, Indocollyre
References
1.Glanz S. [Biomedical statistics]: translation from English. M.: Practice; 1998. 459. Russian.
2.Zhaboiedov GD, Skrypnyk RL, Baran TV. [Eye Diseases]. K.:VSV Meditsyna;2011.99p. Ukrainian.
3.Katargina LA, Arkhipov. [Uveitis: a pathogenic immunosuppressive therapy]. Tver; 2003. 99p. Russian.
4.Katargina LA, Slepova OS, Krichevskaia GN. [Immune diagnosis and immunotropic treatment for endogenous uveitis]. [Proceedings of Actual problem of Ophthalmology]. M.;2003: 370-1. Russian.
5.Konovalova NA, Ponomareva MN, Gnatenko LE. [Comparative analysis of changes in uveitis incidence]. Meditsinskaia nauka i obrazovaniie Urala. 2015;16(1(81)):92-4. Russian.
6.Konovalova NV, Khramenko NI, Scheibe Abderahim, Ivanitskaya EV, Naritsina NI. [Study of the state of the sensory part of the retina and ocular vascular membrane in patients with uveitis using optic coherent tomography]. Oftalmol Zh. 2014;3:34-41. Russian.
7.Kopaienko AI, Zhaboiedov GD. [State of macular area in the retina based on OCT findings in patients with anterior endogenous uveitis]. Fedorovskiie chteniia. M.; 2009: 76. Russian.
8.Suchina L, Lysenko A, Yulish E. [The optimization of diagnostics and treatment of the chronic recurrent uveitis in children, caused by persistent intracellular infections]. Oftalmologiia. Vostochnaia Evropa. 2014;2(21):20-6. Russian.
9.Anesi SD, Foster CS. Anterior uveitis: etiology and treatment. Advanced Ocular Care. 2011. Feb:32-34.
10.Coscas G, Loewenstein A, Bandello F. Optical Coherence Tomography. ESASO Course Series. 2014;4:26-33.
11.Dayani PN. Posterior uveitis: an overview. Advanced ocular care. 2011; Feb: 32-4.
12.Diestelhorst M, Schmidl B, Konen W, Mester U, Sunderaj P. Efficacy and tolerance of diclofenac sodium 0.1%, flurbiprofen 0.03 % and indomethacin 1.0 % in controlling postoperative inflammation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1996;22 (Suppl.): 7880793.
13.Durrani OM, Meads CA, Murray PI. Uveitis: a potentionaly blinding disease. Ophthalmologica. 2004;218:223–36.
14.Foster CS, Vitale AT. Diagnosis and treatment of uveitis – Second Ed. Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers; 2013. 1276 p.
15.Gritz DC, Wong IG. Incidence and prevalence of uveitis in Northern California; the Northern California Epidemiology of uveitis study. Ophthalmology. 2004; 111(3):491-500
16.Groot-Mijnes JDF, Visser L, Zuurveen S et al. Identification of new pathogens in the intraocular fluid of patients with uveitis. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 2010;150(5): 628 – 36.
17.Tomkins–Netzer O, Lightman S, Drye L. Outcome of treatment of uveitic macular edema. The multicenter uveitis steroid treatment trial: 2-year results. Ophthalmology. 2015;122:2351–59.
18.Nussenblatt RB, Whitcup SM. Uveitis: fundamental and clinical practice. 4 – th Ed. Elsevier Inc. 2010. 433 p.
19.Rothova A, Suttorp-Schulten MS, Treffers FW, Kijlstra A. Causes and frequency of blindeness in patients with intraocular inflammatory disease. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1996;80:332–6.
20.Sanders R, McEwen CJ, Haining А. Comparison of prophylactic topical and subconjunctival treatment in cataract surgery. Eye. 1992:105-10.
21.Silverstein A. Changing trends in the etiological diagnosis of uveitis. Documenta Ophthalmologica.1997;94:25-37.
22.Smith JA. Epidemiology and course of disease in childhood uveitis. Ophthalmology. 2009;8:1544-51.
23.Tomkins–Netzer O, Lightman S, Drye L. Outcome of treatment of uveitic macular edema. The multicenter uveitis steroid treatment trial: 2-year results. Ophthalmology. 2015;122:2351–59.
24.Trusko B, Thort J, Jabs D. The Standardization of Uveitis Nomenclature (SUN) Project. Development of clinical evidence base utilizing informatics tools and techniques. Methods Inf. Med. 2013;7(52 (3)):259–65.
25.Trinquand C, Roux M, Dupin O, Arnaud B. Evaluation of non steroidal anti inflammatory agents in presumed bacterial conjunctivitis: comparison of 0,1 % indomethacin and 0,25% prednisolone in association with 1 % rifamycin. New Trends in Ophthalmology. 1989;X(304):1995.
26.Unger WG. Mediation of the ocular response to injury and irritation: peptides versus prostaglandins. Prog. Clin. Biol. Res. 1989;312: 293.
27.Visser L. Infectious uveitis. New deveIopments in ethiology and pathogenesis. Netherlands, Enschede: Gildeprint Drukkerijen; 2009. 227 p.
28.Weinstein GW. Cataract surgery In: William Tasman (Ed.). Duane’s Clinical Ophthalmology J. B. Lippincott Company. 1990;5(7):39.
This paper has been supported by Bausch Health.