Comment on ’Effectiveness of 190 μg Fluocinolone Acetonide versus 700 μg Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implants in Diabetic Macular Edema Using the Area-Under-the-Curve Method: The CONSTANT Analysis’ [Response to Letter]

Abstract

Javier Zarranz-Ventura,1 Joshua O Mali2 1Institut Clínic d’Oftalmología (ICOF), Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain; 2The Eye Associates, Sarasota, FL, USACorrespondence: Javier Zarranz-VenturaInstitut Clínic d’Oftalmología (ICOF), Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, SpainTel [phone]Email [email protected] With interest, we read the letter to the Editor regarding the Effectiveness of 190 μg fluocinolone acetonide versus 700 μg dexamethasone intravitreal implants in diabetic macular edema using the area-under-the-curve method: The CONSTANT analysis by Stewart and Taylor published in Clinical Ophthalmology. The key concerns raised by the authors relate to the design deficiencies of the MEAD studies1 and highlight two specific issues – the six month dosing of the dexamethasone implant and the potentially delayed removal of cataracts.   View the original paper by Zarranz-Ventura and Mali   This is in response to the Letter to the Editor      

Keywords

• area under the curve
• best-corrected visual acuity
• diabetic macular edema
• corticosteroid
• fluocinolone acetonide implant
• dexamethasone implant