Ophthalmology and Therapy (Jul 2024)
Clinical Outcomes and Experiences with Prefilled Syringes Versus Vials for Intravitreal Administration of Anti-VEGF Treatments: A Systematic Review
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents have been the standard treatment for retinal diseases for almost two decades. These treatments are administered via intravitreal injection using single-use vials or prefilled syringes (PFS). In this systematic review, we evaluate health care resource use and clinical outcomes and experiences with PFS for intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF treatments. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library were searched from January 1, 2015 to February 8, 2024 to identify literature reporting outcomes regarding procedural efficiency, health care resource use, patient and clinician experiences, and safety for currently approved anti-VEGFs (ranibizumab, aflibercept, brolucizumab) administered using PFS. Comparators were vial-based injections of the same anti-VEGFs. Results A total of 36 publications met the criteria for inclusion in the systematic literature review; the majority were non-randomized studies, with a small number of reviews, case series, survey studies, and opinion articles. Publications reported that preparation times were significantly shorter for PFS (40.3–57.9 s) versus vials (ranibizumab, 62.8–98.0 s; aflibercept, 71.9–79.5 s), with no differences in product stability between PFS and vials. Clinicians expressed a preference for PFS and thought PFS were faster, easier to use, and had increased safety versus vials. Publications consistently reported significantly lower rates of endophthalmitis per injection with PFS versus vials (ranibizumab PFS, 0–0.02%; aflibercept PFS, 0.01–0.02%; ranibizumab vial, 0.02–0.05%; aflibercept vial, 0.02–0.06%). Four publications reported increased rates of transient vision loss after aflibercept PFS injection versus vial-based injection. No publications reported outcomes regarding health care resource use or patient experiences. Conclusion The available literature supports the increased procedural efficiency of PFS versus vial-based intravitreal injection of anti-VEGFs. PFS are positively perceived by clinicians and have a safety benefit in the form of a decreased risk of endophthalmitis versus vials.
Keywords
