{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019514137793707687, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.558746736292428, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
American Society of Retina Specialists Clinical Practice Guidelines: Management of Nonproliferative and Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy Without Diabetic Macular Edema

Purpose
Nonproliferative (NPDR) and proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) without diabetic macular edema (DME) affect millions of individuals living with diabetes throughout the world. There is increasing data on various management strategies for such patients, but there is limited consensus on how the data should be adopted into clinical practice.


Methods
This literature review and editorial presents and synthesizes the current evidence for various management paradigms for NPDR and PDR without DME.


Results
Retina specialists are an integral member of the diabetes management team, and should encourage patients on the importance of glycemic and cardiovascular optimization for both systemic and retinopathy risk factor reduction. The diabetic retinopathy severity scale (DRSS) is now an approvable endpoint for clinical trials in the United States, therefore becoming more clinically relevant. For PDR without DME, the Diabetic Retinopathy Study (DRS) and the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) established the standard of care with panretinal photocoagulation (PRP). Laser parameters have since evolved to include less intense and earlier intervention. Studies have recently demonstrated that anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment of PDR is effective at regressing neovascularization and improving DRSS levels in many patients. Further evidence is required to determine optimal treatment frequency, duration, and retreatment criteria, in the real world. There are concerns for adverse events in patients being lost to follow up during anti-VEGF treatment. For NPDR without DME, the standard of care has been a wait-and-watch approach. Data within the DRS and the ETDRS suggest that PRP for severe NPDR can be an option for select patients as well. Multiple clinical trials have now demonstrated that anti-VEGF treatment can improve the DRSS score in NPDR. Further studies are required to assess whether this positively affects long-term visual outcomes, and whether the benefits outweigh the risks in the real world for routine use.


Conclusions
There is cumulative evidence demonstrating the efficacy of various treatment options for NPDR and PDR without DME. Currently, patients would most likely benefit from thoughtful management strategies that are tailored to the individual patient.