BACKGROUND: To investigate the subfoveal retinal and choroidal thickness in patients with unilateral Fuchs Uveitis Syndrome (FUS).
METHODS: This comparative contralateral study was performed in affected eyes with FUS versus fellow eyes. For each eye parameters such as subfoveal choroidal thickness (SCT), subfoveal choriocapillary thickness (SCCT), central macular thickness (CMT), and central macular volume (CMV) were measured; then the measured values of affected and fellow unaffected eye were compared.
RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients (74 eyes) including 19 females (51.4%) with a mean age of 36.9 ± 7.6 years were enrolled. The mean SCT was lower in the affected eyes (344.51 ± 91.67) than in the fellow (375.59 ± 87.33) with adjusting for duration of disease and axial lengths (P < 0.001). The mean SCCT, CMT, and CMV were higher in eyes with FUS than in fellow eyes (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The result of our study demonstrated that affected eyes in patients with FUS tend to have thinner SCT and thicker SCCT and CMT compared to uninvolved fellow eyes.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the responses of type 1 and type 2 macular neovascularizations (MNV) caused by neovascular type age-related macular degeneration (n-AMD) to intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatments using quantitative parameters determined by optical coherence tomography (OCT). Additionally, it was also intended to assess the connections between these quantitative parameters and changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and the number of intravitreal anti-VEGF injections required within a year.
METHODS: In our retrospective and observational study, the data of 90 eyes of 90 patients diagnosed with n-AMD and treated with intravitreal anti-VEGF with the \"Pro re nata\" method were evaluated. Subtypes of existing MNVs were distinguished with previously taken optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) images. In spectral domain OCT examinations, central macular thickness (CMT) and central macular volume (CMV) values were recorded at baseline and 12th month. The number of intravitreal anti-VEGF injections during the 12 month follow-up period was also recorded for each patient. Obtained data were compared between MNV types.
RESULTS: Of the n-AMD cases examined in the study, 56.66% had type 1 MNV and 43.34% had type 2 MNV. The mean baseline BCVA logMAR values in eyes with type 2 MNV (1.15 ± 0.43) were higher than those observed in eyes with type 1 MNV (0.76 ± 0.42) (p = 0.001). Similarly, mean baseline CMT and CMV values in eyes with type 2 MNV were higher than those observed in eyes with type 1 MNV (respectively 424.89 ± 49.46 μm vs. 341.39 ± 37.06 μm; 9.17 ± 0.89 μm3 vs. 8.49 ± 0.53 μm3; p < 0.05). After 12 months of treatment, logMAR values of BCVA (0.86 ± 0.42) in subjects with type 2 MNV were higher than those in subjects with type 1 MNV (0.57 ± 0.37) (p = 0.001). Mean CMT and CMV values at 12th month in subjects with type 2 MNV (379.11 ± 46.36 μm and 8.66 ± 0.79 μm3, respectively) were observed to be higher than those with type 1 MNV (296.95 ± 33.96 μm and 8.01 ± 0.52 mm3, respectively) (p < 0.05). In type 2 MNVs, positive correlations were observed between both baseline and 12th month BCVA logMAR values and baseline CMV (p < 0.05). Similarly, in type 2 MNVs, a positive correlation was observed between 12th month BCVA logMAR values and 12th month CMV (p < 0.05). The total number of intravitreal anti-VEGF injections at 12 months was similar in both groups (p = 0.851).
CONCLUSIONS: In this study, in which we performed a subtype analysis of MNV cases, we observed that the visual function was worse at the beginning and the end of the 12th month, and the CMT and CMV values were higher in the type 2 MNV group compared to the type 1 MNV cases. In addition, we found significant correlations between BCVA logMAR values and CMV values in type 2 MNV cases. In the follow-up of these cases, CMT, which is a more widely used quantitative method, and CMV, which is a newer OCT measurement parameter, may be more useful in patient follow-up and evaluation of treatment efficacy, especially for type 2 MNV cases.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the visual and anatomic outcomes of intravitreal ranibizumab versus aflibercept in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) in a real-world study.
METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective comparative study of treatment-naïve patients who received intravitreal ranibizumab or aflibercept administration for DME for at least 12 months on an as needed regimen following three-monthly loading doses. The primary outcomes of the study were the mean change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and central macular volume (CMV). Factors to potentially affect these parameters were also analyzed.
RESULTS: A total of 100 eyes (66 patients) were included in the study. Fifty two eyes received ranibizumab and 48 eyes in aflibercept injections. At the end of follow-up, the improvement in mean BCVA was similar in both groups (p = 0.38). While the decrease in mean CMT at the 4th-month visit was significantly higher in the aflibercept-treated group than in the ranibizumab-treated group (p = 0.02), there was no difference between the two groups at the end of the 1-year follow-up (p = 0.25). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of change in mean CMV during the follow-up (p = 0.26, p = 0.27 at 4 and 12 months, respectively). The mean number of injections were also similar between groups (4.5 ± 1 vs. 4.6 ± 1.1 respectively, p = 0.63).
CONCLUSIONS: In a real-world setting, ranibizumab and aflibercept were both found to be effective in the first-line treatment of DME. Patients with DME who received fewer injections in the real-world could achieve visual and anatomical results comparable to randomized controlled trials participants.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of epiretinal membrane (ERM) formation on the anatomic and functional results of subjects with diabetic macular edema (DME) who are receiving intravitreal aflibercept injections (IAIs).
METHODS: This retrospective comparative study includes 29 eyes with DME (Group 1) and 43 eyes with DME and ERM (Group 2). After three consecutive monthly 2.0 mg IAIs, subjects received monthly follow-ups and retreatment was performed if needed. Corrected visual acuity (CVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and central macular volume (CMV) parameters were recorded tri-monthly, and the 36-month follow-up was designated the primary endpoint of the study.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference between groups when comparing the mean ages and male-to-female ratios (p > 0.05, for both). At the baseline, the mean CVA value was significantly worse (p = 0.002), and the mean CMT was significantly lower (p = 0.016) in Group 1, while there was no significant difference in terms of the mean CMV (p = 0.625). The mean number of IAIs was similar at the first (p < 0.102), second (p = 0.363), and third year (p = 0.850) follow-ups. The mean CVA was significantly worse, and CMT was significantly lower in Group 1 at most of the visits in the first half of the follow-up period (p < 0.05, for all), while there was no significant difference in the second half of the follow-up period. There was no significant difference between groups in terms of CMV at any visit (p > 0.05, for all).
CONCLUSIONS: Despite a similar number of IAIs needed, worse baseline clinical parameters are associated with poorer early- or mid-term outcomes. At the long-term follow-up, CVA and CMT became similar in DME independent of ERM.