For years, the presence or appearance of new subretinal hemorrhages has been considered as evidence of an active CNV.

This concept is so widely accepted that its part of the decision-making algorithm of most studies. Therefore, its presence is a synonym for additional anti-VEGF injections.

In the absence of IRF or SRF, is there an additional benefit of additional anti-VEGF? A new hemorrhage is evidence of exudative activity? I wish to know your opinion.