Effect of Vitreomacular Adhesion on Treatment Outcomes in the Ranibizumab for Edema of the Macula in Diabetes (READ-3) Study

Purpose To assess the role of vitreomacular adhesion (VMA) in visual and anatomic outcomes in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). Design Retrospective cohort study. Participants Data from patients enrolled in the Ranibizumab for Edema of the Macula in Diabetes: Protocol 3 with High Dose (READ-3) study were analyzed. Methods In the READ-3 study, patients with DME received monthly intravitreal injections of either 0.5 or 2.0 mg ranibizumab. Optical coherence tomography images from patients who completed the month 6 visit of the study were analyzed at the baseline visit to identify the presence (VMA+) or absence (VMA−) of VMA. Patients with any degree of vitreomacular traction were excluded from the analysis. Two independent graders graded all images. Vitreomacular adhesion was classified by size of adhesion into either focal ( Main Outcome Measures Mean changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal thickness (CRT) at month 6 and incidence of posterior vitreous detachment (PVD). Results One hundred fifty-two eyes (152 patients) were randomized in the READ-3 study. One hundred twenty-four eyes (124 patients) were eligible for the study based on study criteria. Twenty-eight eyes did not meet study criteria and were excluded from the study. At baseline, 26 patients were classified as VMA+ and 98 patients were classified as VMA−. The distribution of the 2 doses of ranibizumab (0.5 and 2.0 mg) in the 2 groups was similar. At month 6, the mean improvement in BCVA was 11.31±6.67 and 6.86±7.58 letters in the VMA+ and VMA− groups, respectively ( P  = 0.007). Mean improvement in CRT was −173.81±132.31 and −161.84±131.34 μm in the VMA+ and VMA− groups, respectively ( P  = 0.681). At month 6, among the 26 VMA+ eyes (at baseline), 7 eyes demonstrated PVD, 17 eyes showed no change in VMA status, and 2 eyes were not gradable and were excluded. Conclusions Diabetic macular edema patients with VMA have a greater potential for improvement in visual outcomes with anti–vascular endothelial growth factor therapy. Therefore, the presence of VMA should not preclude patients with DME from receiving treatment.