Medical Policy

A port delivery system is a novel type of drug delivery platform using a permanent drug-eluting implant inserted into and through the sclera of the eye to allow delivery of drugs to the intravitreal space. Such systems consist of a transscleral device that includes a reservoir and release control element to distribute drugs within the eye. A self-sealing extrascleral flange, which is visible through the conjunctiva, allows refilling of the reservoir as needed. Port delivery systems have been proposed as an alternative to monthly intravitreal injections in the treatment of retinal and potentially other ocular diseases.

Investigational and Not Medically Necessary:

The use of a port delivery system to treat ocular disease is considered investigational and not medically necessary for all indications.

Wet or neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD)

Untreated AMD will result in progressive vision loss. The current treatments of neovascular AMD include photodynamic or intravitreal injections of an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF). Anti-VEGF therapy blocks the VEGF protein, slowing the growth of abnormal blood vessels and slowing the rate of vision loss. The current U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)  approved anti-VEGF agents include bevacizumab (Avastin), aflibercept (Eylea) and ranibizumab (Lucentis). Individuals with AMD typically require monthly intravitreal injections. The use of anti-VEGF therapy has been used for other ocular disease including macular edema, diabetic retinopathy and retinal vein occlusion. However, the vision gains reported by the use of anti-VEGF agents in clinical trials have not replicated in clinical practice. In clinical practice, initial vison gains shown were lost or significantly reduced in later years. This reduced efficacy appears to be related to the treatment regimen. Khanani and colleagues (2021) reported that individuals who remain on long-term fixed-interval anti-VEGF therapy maintained vision outcomes through year 7. The implanted, refillable port delivery system has been proposed as a way of reducing treatment burden without compromising vision through the sustained release of an anti-VEGF agent. The port delivery system decreases the number of intravitreal injections an individual needs to undergo, as the reservoir only needs to be refilled approximately every 6 months. Currently the only anti-VEGF agent FDA approved for use with the port delivery system is ranibizumab.

On October 22, 2021, the FDA approved Susvimo^™ (Genentech, Inc. South San Francisco, CA), a form of the biologic drug ranibizumab, for intravitreal use via a port delivery system (PDS) ocular implant for the treatment of neovascular AMD. Susvimo and the ocular implant are meant to be used in those who had previously responded to at least two anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections.

Holekamp and associates (2021) reported on the results of a phase 3, open-label, randomized, visual acuity assessor-masked noninferiority and equivalence trial (Archway). Individuals aged 50 years or older with a diagnosis of neovascular AMD made within 9 months of screening, with a positive response to at least three prior anti-VEGF intravitreal injections, were randomized to receive either the port delivery system with ranibizumab (n=248) or intravitreal injections every 4 weeks (n=167). The primary end point was established as the change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) score from baseline averaged over weeks 36 and 40. A total of 240 (96.8%) individuals in the port delivery system group and 162 (97.0%) individuals in the monthly injection group completed the study through week 40. The change in the BCVA score from baseline averaged over weeks 36 and 40 was +0.2 in the port delivery system group and +0.5 in the monthly injection group. Based on the pre-study standards, the port delivery system was clinically noninferior and equivalent to the monthly injections. The port delivery system group reported more ocular adverse events (AEs) compared to the monthly injection group, with most events occurring during the post-operative period. In addition to non-serious AEs, there were a total of 20 serious AEs occurring in the port delivery system group including conjunctival erosion, conjunctival retraction, endophthalmitis, rhegmatogenous retinal detachment, necrotizing retinitis, retinal tear, visual acuity reduced, vision impairment, choroidal detachment and implant dislocation. There were 2 serious AEs in the monthly injection group including vitreous hemorrhage and facial bone fracture. The rate of AEs in this trial resulted in the FDA inserting a Black Box Warning to the prescribing information (PI) label. The study analysis included data from only one complete refill interval. Further studies with longer follow-up are needed.

In 2023, the 2-year results of the Archway trial were reported by Regillo and colleagues. Following an initial transient and reversible decrease in BCVA in the implantation group, both groups reported similar mean BCVA change from baseline through week 96. An additional 8 serious ocular AEs were reported in the implantation group compared to 2 in the monthly injection group. These serious ocular AEs included 3 cases of implant dislocation and conjunctival erosion, reduced visual acuity, cataract cortical, conjunctival bleb, corneal disorder, retinal pigment epithelial tear, scleral thinning, retinal tear and endophthalmitis. One individual in the implantation group experienced a traumatic cataract which was the result of surgical removal of a dislocated implant. The 4 cases of implant dislocation were treated with implant removal. The vision returned to baseline in 3 individuals. The 4^th individual experienced additional complications and the vision remained markedly decreased (Snellen equivalent 20/32 at baseline compared to < 20/200 at last available visit). These cases were attributed to surgical error regarding length of the surgical incision. There were 3 cases of implant septum dislodgement with 2 cases occurring after at least 1 refill-exchange procedure. The third case occurred 112 days after the 3^rd refill-exchange procedure. Additional follow-up data is being collected through 5 years post-implantation. The authors note:

However, whether or not these or other novel long-lasting treatments are able to respond to the unmet medical need for reduced treatment burden in nAMD will depend not only on their effectiveness in gaining and maintaining visual function but also on their overall long-term safety profile.

Campochiaro and colleagues published interim results of an extension clinical trial titled the Portal Extension Trial (2024). Individuals who had participated in the Archway or Ladder trials (n=555) participated with a mean follow-up of 111 weeks. Participants from the monthly injection groups in the original studies were transitioned to a port delivery system. All participants received refill exchanges of ranibizumab every 24 weeks. All participants were evaluated at 8 and 4 weeks prior to scheduled refill for decrease in BCVA, triggering supplemental treatment. Approximately 24.7% of participants experienced at least 1 ocular AE of special interest, the most common being cataracts (11.4%). Endophthalmitis was documented in 2.0% of participants (11/555). Over a period of 48 months, visual acuity remained stable for these individuals, with a mean change in BCVA of 0.1 letters for those previously treated with the implant 100 mg/mL and 2.3 letters for those who received monthly ranibizumab. Approximately 95% of participants did not require supplemental treatment between refill exchanges, and 92% preferred the port delivery system over traditional injections. While these interim results suggest that the visual and anatomic outcomes can be sustained over at least 48 months, the data available at the cutoff data included only a small number of individuals. A more comprehensive evaluation of the long-term outcomes can be done when further data is available.

In a phase 2, multicenter, randomized, active treatment controlled clinical trial, Campochiaro and colleagues (2019) reported on the safety and efficacy of the port delivery system used with ranibizumab. The inclusion criteria included those aged 50 and older who had been diagnosed within 9 months of study screening and who had been responsive to between 2 and 9 anti-VEGF agent injections. Individuals receiving monthly intravitreal injections (n=41) were compared to individuals receiving ranibizumab at varying concentration levels with the port delivery system including 10 mg/ml (n=58), 40 mg/ml (n=62) and 100 mg/ml (n=59). The primary endpoint was the time to first implant refill. Additionally, improvement in BCVA, central foveal thickness (CFT) and safety endpoints were assessed. The port delivery system used with the 100 mg/ml concentration reported the highest efficacy rate, with only 1.7% of participants not meeting clinical efficacy criteria. The lower concentration groups reported 22.4% and 4.8% of participants did not meet clinical efficacy criteria. The BCVA and CFT were similar across the monthly injection group and the port delivery system concentration 100 mg/ml group. The monthly injection group did not report any serious ocular AEs. The port delivery system groups reported serious ocular AEs in 8.9% (16/179) of participants. This phase 2 study met its primary objective of assessing the relative efficacy of port delivery system therapy at varying formulations. Further studies beyond this proof-of-concept study are needed to fully evaluate implications of using a permanent refillable intraocular reservoir to deliver biologic therapy for neovascular AMD.

Diabetic Retinopathy

Diabetic retinopathy is a diabetes-related condition characterized by damage to the retinal blood vessels due to prolonged high blood sugar levels, leading to vision impairment and potentially blindness. It progresses through various stages, from mild to severe nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy, to proliferative diabetic retinopathy, which involves neovascularization and can significantly threaten vision. Diabetic macular edema is a specific manifestation of diabetic retinopathy, involving the accumulation of fluid in the macula due to increased vascular permeability and retinal swelling. This results in significant visual distortion or loss, especially central vision. The relationship between diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema is intrinsic: as diabetic retinopathy progresses, particularly to more advanced stages like proliferative diabetic retinopathy, the risk of developing diabetic macular edema increases, exacerbating the impact on vision. Effective management of diabetic retinopathy is crucial in reducing the risk and impact of diabetic macular edema, making careful monitoring and timely intervention essential to prevent severe vision loss.

On February 4, 2025, the FDA expanded the approved indications for Susvimo to include treatment of individuals with diabetic macular edema who have previously responded to at least 2 intravitreal injections of a VEGF inhibitor. The approval is based on the unpublished results of the Pagoda trial (NCT04108156), a randomized, visual assessor-masked, active treatment-controlled study. Individuals with diabetic macular edema received continuous delivery of Susvimo (n=381) or intravitreal ranibizumab injections every 4 weeks (n=253). Change in BCVA distance score from baseline to score averaged from week 60 to week 64 was set as the primary efficacy endpoint. Susvimo demonstrated non-inferiority compared to intravitreal ranibizumab injections (adjusted mean changes of 9.6 and 9.4 letters, respectively). Susvimo's administration came with a higher incidence of adverse events, such as conjunctival reactions, vitreous hemorrhage, and endophthalmitis, with the latter observed at a rate of 0.7% in trials, underscoring the necessity for careful procedural handling and monitoring. Potential vision decreases were also noted, such as a mean reduction in visual acuity by 4 letters in the first postoperative month. Limitations included participant response variability, unknown long-term safety, and the need for experienced physicians to perform procedures under aseptic conditions to minimize complications.

Pieramici and colleagues reported on the results of a phase 3, multicenter, randomized clinical study that evaluated the efficacy of the PDS with ranibizumab (100 mg/mL, refilled every 36 weeks) against a control group receiving no PDS (Pavilion trial, 2025). The authors did not specifically state what treatment, if any, the control group received. Both groups underwent monthly monitoring, with the examiners and reding center graders blinded to group assignment. The trial included 174 participants with moderately severe to severe nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy without center-involved diabetic macular edema. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving at least a 2-step improvement on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) from baseline to week 52. Results showed a significant improvement in the PDS group (80.1%) compared to the control group (9.0%), highlighting a notable difference of 71.1% (p<0.001). At week 52, the PDS group showed significantly better outcomes, with 80.1% achieving at least a 2-step improvement on the ETDRS scale compared to 9.0% in the control group. Additionally, the PDS group had a substantially reduced progression rate to center-involved diabetic macular edema, proliferative diabetic retinopathy, or anterior segment neovascularization (7.1% versus. 47.0%, p<0.001), and an improvement in BCVA of +1.4 letters compared to a decline of -2.6 letters in the control group (p<0.01). While this study was partially blinded, and randomized and controlled, the lack of clarity of the control procedures and treatment, the short follow-up time and, other factors limit the utility of these results. Additional trials, focusing on visual acuity, central subfield thickness, and treatment burden are needed to further evaluate the safety and effectiveness of this potential treatment in management long-term ocular disease. 

A second phase 3 multicenter study (Pagoda Trial) compared the efficacy and safety of continuous ranibizumab delivery via a PDS device every 24 weeks to monthly intravitreal ranibizumab injections for treating DME (Khanani 2025). Participants aged 18 or older with center-involved DME secondary to type 1 or 2 diabetes  received the PDS (refilled every 24 weeks) device (n=381) or monthly injections (n=253). The study followed participants for 64 weeks, the primary endpoint was BCVA averaged over weeks 60 and 64. The results revealed that the PDS arm provided noninferior visual outcomes compared to monthly treatment, with a mean BCVA change of +9.6 letters in the PDS arm and +9.4 in the monthly injections arm. While the PDS arm reduced treatment frequency significantly, the PDS arm reported higher rate of ocular AEs compared to the monthly injections arm (925 ocular AEs in 91.9% of participants compared to 359 ocular AEs in 44.6% of participants, respectively. In the PDS arm, there were 12 serious AEs, consisting of 5 conjunctival erosions, 4 conjunctival blebs, and single incidents of cataract, conjunctival retraction, vitreous hemorrhage, and implant dislocation. The monthly injections arm reported 1 event each of cataract and endophthalmitis. In the PDS arm, there was one case of implant dislocation / explantation and one case of septum dislodgement. The individual had received 2 refill exchanges prior to septum dislodgement.

The standard of care for diabetic retinopathy involves regular screenings, effective management of blood pressure and glucose levels, and appropriate therapeutic interventions. The American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) preferred practice pattern regarding diabetic retinopathy (2024) emphasizes annual dilated fundus examinations, management of glucose and blood pressure, and the use of intravitreal anti-VEGF agents for treating center-involved diabetic macular edema  and proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Panretinal photocoagulation remains a primary treatment for proliferative diabetic retinopathy. While the Pagoda and Pavilion trials provided short-term data regarding clinical outcomes compared to current accepted treatments, additional data regarding long-term outcomes and using real world clinical settings are needed.

Warnings

The PI label (2025) includes the following Black Box Warning regarding endophthalmitis:

The SUSVIMO implant has been associated with a 3-fold higher rate of endophthalmitis than monthly intravitreal injections of ranibizumab.

The FDA also requested the following additional warnings and precautions be included in the label:

The SUSVIMO implant and/or implant-related procedures have been associated with endophthalmitis, rhegmatogenous retinal detachment, implant dislocation, septum dislodgement, vitreous hemorrhage, conjunctival retraction, conjunctival erosion, and conjunctival blebs. Patients should be instructed to report any signs or symptoms that could be associated with these events without delay. Additional surgical and/or medical management may be required.

Vitreous Hemorrhage: Temporarily discontinue antithrombotic medication prior to the implant insertion procedure to reduce the risk of vitreous hemorrhage. Vitrectomy may be needed.

Postoperative Decrease in Visual Acuity: A decrease in visual acuity usually occurs over the first two postoperative months.

Voluntary Recall

In October 2022, the Susvimo ocular implant and initial fill needle were voluntarily recalled due to issues with the durability of the product over the long-term following multiple refills. In clinical trials, the septum of the implant has become dislodged from the implant body resulting a potential for medication leakage. The recall does not include the refill equipment. For individuals with a defective implant, further refill-exchange procedures should not be performed. The manufacturer notes “The long-term risks of retaining vs. removing an implant with a dislodged septum are not well characterized at this time.”

Timmons and associates (2022) reported on an individual who experienced an implanted septum dislodgement case in a clinical trial. Post refill implant photography after the third refill revealed that the septum had fallen into the implant reservoir. The septum began a downward migration following device implantation and progressed with each subsequent refill. The provider confirmed the correct refill procedure was followed and penetration of the septum was achieved on the first attempt at each refill. The presence of the implant with a nonfunctioning seal may be associated with a risk of intraocular inflammation. The voluntary recall was lifted in April 2024.

AEs

Campochiaro and associates (2024) categorized a group of AEs as potentially related to the device or insertion of the device as AEs of special interest noting: 

These ocular AESIs [adverse events of special interest] were AEs that were considered to be potentially related to the PDS implant or implant insertion procedure, as follows: cataract (i.e., cataract, cataract nuclear, cataract cortical, and cataract subcapsular), conjunctival thickening (bleb) or thickening filtering (bleb) leak, conjunctival erosion, conjunctival retraction, endophthalmitis, hyphema, implant dislocation, rhegmatogenous retinal detachment, vitreous hemorrhage, and septum dislodgement (nonprespecified AESI, defined as a type of device deficiency where the septum has dislodged into the body of the implant and normal device functioning cannot be assured).

Summary

The use of anti-VEGF agents such as ranibizumab are very effective and are considered standard therapy to treat neovascular AMD. In clinical practice, long-term visual acuity outcomes are worse than outcomes reported in clinical trials. This is likely due to compliance issues resulting in decreased monitoring and treatment frequency (Holekamp, 2021). The port delivery system is being evaluated as an alternative to monthly injections which may increase treatment compliance. The port delivery system is more invasive than the current approach and is associated with a significant increased risk of endophthalmitis. Additional research is needed to evaluate the long-term performance and complication rate of the port delivery system. Longitudinal data is needed to confirm potential improved visual outcomes and real-world results will not be available for several years. In addition, further investigation is needed to address whether treatment with the port delivery system is generalizable to a more diverse clinical population, including those living with a longstanding neovascular AMD diagnosis. A clinical trial (NCT NCT03683251) is underway to further evaluate the individuals in previous trials for approximately 240 weeks. The estimated study completion date is December 2026. Interim results have been published (Campochiaro, 2024).

Holekamp and associates (2024) systematically compared the long-term safety and complications of the PDS with ranibizumab against other ocular implants. The authors reported that the port delivery system reported comparable safety profiles to established ocular implants, with device-related complications noted at median rates of 0.7% in clinical trials and 1.3% in real-world studies, and conjunctival complications at 2.1% and 2.2% respectively across clinical trials (n=16) and real-world studies (n=43). The authors concluded further long-term studies are needed noting:

Further studies with longer follow-up, larger sample sizes, and a greater range of pre-specified, consistently defined complications will help contextualize and build confidence regarding the long-term safety of ocular implants, including the PDS.

Other Retinal Disease

Additional clinical trials are being performed investigating port delivery systems for the treatment of other retinal conditions, such as  diabetic retinopathy, including, but not limited to the  Pavilion study (NCT04503551).

The ocular implant used with Susvimo is inserted during an outpatient procedure, with the reservoir filled prior to placement. The implant is surgically placed in an incision through the sclera and pars plana. The implant contains a self-sealing septum used to refill the port. The drug is continuously released into the vitreous through passive diffusion. The reservoir is refilled approximately every 6 months during an office setting visit.

AMD is the leading cause of vision loss in older adults, affecting approximately 11 million people in the U.S. AMD is categorized as either dry or atrophic AMD, which is more common, and wet or advanced neovascular AMD. Neovascular AMD is characterized by macular or choroidal neovascularization, fluid leakage and central vision loss. Monthly intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy is considered the standard of care therapy for wet AMD. In clinical practice, decreased treatment frequency over time is often reported and has been identified as a possible cause of reduced VEGF therapy effectiveness in clinical practice compared to clinical trials (Khanani, 2021).

The following codes for treatments and procedures applicable to this document are included below for informational purposes. Inclusion or exclusion of a procedure, diagnosis or device code(s) does not constitute or imply member coverage or provider reimbursement policy. Please refer to the member's contract benefits in effect at the time of service to determine coverage or non-coverage of these services as it applies to an individual member.

When services are Investigational and Not Medically Necessary:

When services may also be Investigational and Not Medically Necessary:
For the following procedure code or when the code describes a procedure indicated in the Position Statement section as investigational and not medically necessary.

Peer Reviewed Publications:

1. Campochiaro PA, Eichenbaum D, Chang MA, et al. Interim results of the phase III portal extension trial of the port delivery system with ranibizumab in neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmol Retina. 2024: S2468-6530(24)00400-7.
2. Campochiaro PA, Maass KF, Singh N, Barteselli G. Reply. Ophthalmology. 2019; 126(11):e88-e89.
3. Campochiaro PA, Marcus DM, Awh CC, et al. The port delivery system with ranibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: Results from the randomized Phase 2 Ladder clinical trial. Ophthalmology. 2019; 126(8):1141-1154.
4. Holekamp NM, Campochiaro PA, Chang M, et al.; Archway Investigators. Archway randomized phase 3 trial of the port delivery system with ranibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology. 2021: S0161-6420(21)00734-X.
5. Holekamp NM, Yaqub M, Ranade SV, et al. Systematic literature reviews comparing the long-term safety outcomes for the port delivery system with ranibizumab (PDS) versus other ocular implants. Ophthalmol Ther. 2024; 13(9):2303-2329.
6. Khanani AM, Aziz AA, Weng CY, et al. Port delivery system: a novel drug delivery platform to treat retinal diseases. Expert Opin Drug Deliv. 2021; 18(11):1571-1576.
7. Khanani AM, Callanan D, Dreyer R, et al.; of the Ladder Investigators. End-of-study results for the Ladder Phase 2 trial of the port delivery system with ranibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmol Retina. 2021; 5(8):775-787.
8. Khanani AM, Campochiaro PA, Graff JM, et al. Continuous ranibizumab via port delivery system vs monthly ranibizumab for treatment of diabetic macular edema: the pagoda randomized clinical trial. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2025: e250006.
9. Pieramici DJ, Awh CC, Chang M, et al. Port delivery system with ranibizumab vs monitoring in nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy without macular edema: the pavilion randomized clinical trial. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2025 Mar 6.
10. Regillo C, Berger B, Brooks L, et al. Archway Phase 3 Trial of the Port Delivery System with Ranibizumab for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration 2-Year Results. Ophthalmology. 2023; 130(7):735-747.
11. Sharma A, Khanani AM, Parachuri N, et al. Port delivery system with ranibizumab (Susvimo) recall- What does it mean to the retina specialists. Int J Retina Vitreous. 2023; 9(1):6.
12. Sharma A, Kumar N, Kuppermann BD, Francesco B. Re: Campochiaro et al.: The port delivery system with ranibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: results from the randomized phase 2 Ladder clinical trial (Ophthalmology. 2019;126:1141-1154). Ophthalmology. 2019; 126(11):e87-e88.
13. Timmons K, Heckmann LC, Ren Y, et al. Ranibizumab injection (Susvimo) implant septum dislodgement in a patient with neovascular age-related macular degeneration. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2022; 140(8):832.

Government Agency, Medical Society, and Other Authoritative Publications:

1. American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO). For additional information, see the AAO website at https://www.aao.org/. Accessed on March 10, 2025.
   • Age-Related Macular Degeneration Preferred Practice Pattern^®. Approved on February 7, 2025.
   • Diabetic Retinopathy Preferred Practice Pattern. Approved on June 2024.
2. Genentech. Dear Health Care Provider Letter. Voluntary recall of the Susvimo Ocular Implant. October 2022. Available at: https://www.gene.com/download/pdf/Susvimo_DHCP_Important_Prescribing_Information_2022-10-18.pdf. Accessed on January 8, 2025.
3. Susvimo [Product Information], South San Francisco, CA. Genentech, Inc.; Updated on February 2025. Available at: https://www.gene.com/download/pdf/susvimo_prescribing.pdf. Accessed on February 5, 2025.
4. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Biologics License Application Approval. SUSVIMO (ranibizumab injection). BLA 761197. October 22, 2021. Available at: https://www.gene.com/download/pdf/susvimo_prescribing.pdf. Accessed on February 5, 2025.
5. U.S. National Library of Medicine. Clinical Trials.
   • NCT03683251. A Multicenter, Open-Label Extension Study to Evaluate the Long-Term Safety and Tolerability of the Port Delivery System With Ranibizumab in Patients With Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration (Portal). Last updated January 24, 2025. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03683251. Accessed on February 5, 2025.
   • NCT04108156. A Phase III, Multicenter, Randomized, Visual Assessor-Masked, Active-comparator Study of the Efficacy, Safety, and Pharmacokinetics of the Port Delivery System With Ranibizumab in Patients With Diabetic Macular Edema (Pagoda). Last updated on October 15, 2024. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04108156?term=NCT04108156&draw=1&rank=1. Accessed on February 5, 2025.
   • NCT04503551. A Phase III, Multicenter, Randomized Study of the Efficacy, Safety, and Pharmacokinetics of the Port Delivery System With Ranibizumab in Patients With Diabetic Retinopathy. Last updated on January 17, 2025. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04503551?term=NCT04503551&draw=2&rank=1. Accessed on February 5, 2025.

1. National Institute of Health (NIH). National Eye Institute. Age-Related Macular Degeneration. Last updated: June 22, 2021. Available at: https://www.nei.nih.gov/learn-about-eye-health/eye-conditions-and-diseases/age-related-macular-degeneration. Accessed on January 8, 2025.
2. The American Society of Retina Specialists (ASRS). Age-Related Macular Degeneration. Available at: https://www.asrs.org/patients/retinal-diseases/2/agerelated-macular-degeneration. Accessed on January 8, 2025.

Susvimo

The use of specific product names is illustrative only. It is not intended to be a recommendation of one product over another, and is not intended to represent a complete listing of all products available.

Federal and State law, as well as contract language, including definitions and specific contract provisions/exclusions, take precedence over Medical Policy and must be considered first in determining eligibility for coverage. The member’s contract benefits in effect on the date that services are rendered must be used. Medical Policy, which addresses medical efficacy, should be considered before utilizing medical opinion in adjudication. Medical technology is constantly evolving, and we reserve the right to review and update Medical Policy periodically.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, or otherwise, without permission from the health plan.