Resource Use and Costs Associated With Diabetic Macular Edema in Elderly Persons

Shea, Alisa M.; Curtis, Lesley H.; Hammill, Bradley G.; Kowalski, Jonathan W.; Ravelo, Arliene; Lee, Paul P.; Sloan, Frank A.; Schulman, Kevin A.

doi:10.1001/archopht.126.12.1748

Cited by 73 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(23 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The use of fluorescein angiography, optical coherence tomography (OCT), intravitreal injection, and laser photocoagulation as well as the number of evaluation and management visits were compared between an incident DME cohort and a control cohort of diabetic patients without retinal disease 38 . The study showed that nearly 60% of DME patients received one or more fluorescein angiography in the year after diagnosis; 38% underwent laser photocoagulation; 18% were evaluated with OCT; and 6% received at least one intravitreal injection.…”

Section: Health Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Burden of illness of diabetic macular edema: literature review

Er¹,

Looman²,

Laouri³

et al. 2010

Current Medical Research and Opinion

132

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Health Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The decrease in patients treated with laser photocoagulation was concurrent with a shift towards intravitreal injections. In 2000, less than 1% of incident DME patients received an injection, but by 2004, 13% of incident patients had one 38 .…”

Section: Health Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Burden of illness of diabetic macular edema: literature review

Er¹,

Looman²,

Laouri³

et al. 2010

Current Medical Research and Opinion

132

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The panelists also recognize that the frequency of anti-VEGF injections required can be burdensome for patients, 34,35 but in the experience of the panelists, patients are likely to adhere to frequent injections if they are educated on the alternative of risk of permanent loss of vision. The consensus opinion of the panel is that frequent monitoring is also needed for patients who have switched to corticosteroid implant treatment, but the recommended interval between visits for these patients is longer (1 to 2 months) than that recommended for patients on anti-VEGF therapy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of Corticosteroids in the Treatment of Patients With Diabetic Macular Edema Who Have a Suboptimal Response to Anti-VEGF: Recommendations of an Expert Panel

Regillo¹,

Callanan²,

Diana³

et al. 2017

Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Guidance on the use of corticosteroids in the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) is lacking. This study aimed to develop a clinically recommended treatment paradigm for DME with emphasis on the role of corticosteroids. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An expert panel of nine retinal specialists in the United States developed consensus recommendations for DME treatment through a modified Delphi process. RESULTS: The panelists typically use intravitreal injections of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) antagonists as first-line treatment of DME and switch patients with an inadequate response to anti-VEGF therapy (failure of best-corrected visual acuity to improve to 20/40 or better because of edema after three to six monthly injections, or a less-than-50% reduction in excess macular thickness after three to four monthly injections) to intravitreal corticosteroid treatment. CONCLUSION: Intravitreal corticosteroids have a potentially useful role in the treatment of patients with DME who have an inadequate response to intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy. [ Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2017;48:291–301.]

show abstract

“…In that study, medical costs in the first year after diagnosis were 31% higher than for matched controls. 23 Vision services related to AMD were a significant cost driver, representing 27% of total Medicare costs in the postindex period. These costs increased significantly over time and were almost 50% higher in the 2008 cohort than in the 2004 cohort.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%