AimGonadal hormones are essential for reproductive function, but can act on neural and other organ systems, and are probably the cause of the large majority of known sex differences in function and disease. The aim of this review is to provide evidence for this hypothesis in relation to eye disorders and to retinopathies in particular.MethodsEpidemiological studies and research articles were reviewed.ResultsAnalysis of the biological basis for a relationship between eye diseases and hormones showed that estrogen, androgen, and progesterone receptors are present throughout the eye and that these steroids are locally produced in ocular tissues. Sex hormones can have a neuroprotective action on the retina and modulate ocular blood flow. There are differences between the male and the female retina; moreover, sex hormones can influence the development (or not) of certain disorders. For example, exposure to endogenous estrogens, depending on age at menarche and menopause and number of pregnancies, and exposure to exogenous estrogens, as in hormone replacement therapy and use of oral contraceptives, appear to protect against age-related macular degeneration (both drusenoid and neurovascular types), whereas exogenous testosterone therapy is a risk factor for central serous chorioretinopathy. Macular hole is more common among women than men, particularly in postmenopausal women probably owing to the sudden drop in estrogen production in later middle age. Progestin therapy appears to ameliorate the course of retinitis pigmentosa. Diabetic retinopathy, a complication of diabetes, may be more common among men than women.ConclusionWe observed a correlation between many retinopathies and sex, probably as a result of the protective effect some gonadal hormones may exert against the development of certain disorders. This may have ramifications for the use of hormone therapy in the treatment of eye disease and of retinal disorders in particular.

Aim: This review article presents a comprehensive overview of the literature on sex hormones (estrogens, androgens, progesterone) and optic nerve disorders, with a discussion of the implications for therapy and prevention.Methods: Epidemiological, pre-clinical and clinical studies were reviewed.Results: Analysis of the biological basis for a relationship between eye diseases and sex hormones showed that some types of hormones can exert a protective effect either directly on the retina and optic nerve or indirectly by modulating ocular blood flow. For example, it seems that estrogen exposure has a protective effect against glaucoma, whereas its deficit may lead to early onset of the disease. If further studies confirm the data in the literature, estrogen therapy, because of its antioxidant action, may be effective in the treatment of Leber's hereditary optic neuropathy, whereas, in the light of current studies, there does not seem to be an influence of estrogen on non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuritis (NAION).Conclusions: Although there is some evidence that in some optic nerve pathologies the sex hormones seem to play an important role there are still too few studies providing evidence for its wider use in clinical practice.

This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of different decompressive injection techniques in reducing intraocular pressure (IOP) spikes, if compared to the injection without pressure applied on the eye, following the intravitreal injection of bevacizumab. Patients and Methods: Two hundred patients with indication to intravitreal therapy were randomized into five arms: 40 received intravitreal injection without ocular decompression (arm A), 40 with pre-injection scleral indentation with cotton swab (arm B), 40 with preinjection digital ocular massage (arm C), 40 with post-injection scleral indentation with cotton swab (arm D) and 40 with post-injection digital ocular massage (arm E). All patients underwent measurement of the IOP with Goldamm applanation tonometer 10 minutes before and 10 minutes after the injection. The primary endpoint of the study was variation of the post-injection IOP with the different techniques. Results: An increase in post-injection IOP was observed in all the arms, if compared to preinjection values. The greatest increase was observed in arm A with a mean IOP rise of 17.60 mmHg. All other techniques showed lower mean IOP increases: arm B 10.76 mmHg, arm C 9.35 mmHg, arm D 8.8 mmHg, arm E 3.4 mmHg. The post-injection IOP differences of innovative techniques compared to the technique without ocular decompression were all statistically significant (p-value <0.01). If compared to arm A (35%), a reduction in IOP spike ≥40 mmHg frequency was also observed. The status of phakia/pseudophakia, a previous diagnosis of glaucoma and the underlying pathology for which indication was given to inject bevacizumab did not significantly alter the post-injection IOP in any of the protocols. Conclusion: The introduction of new injection protocols, such as injections performed before or after decompressive treatments, could be a safe and effective approach to control post-injection IOP increase.

Many viral infections can affect vision and the visual system. Vaccination to prevent diseases is commonplace today, acting by stimulating an immune response without developing the pathology. It involves the production of persisting antibodies against the pathogen and the activation of T cells. Certain diseases have already been eradicated by rigorous vaccination campaigns, while others are hoped to be eliminated soon. Vaccines currently available on the market are largely safe, even if they can rarely cause some adverse effects, such as ocular complications. Analyzing existing literature, we aimed to compare the pathological effects on the eye due to the most common viral infections [in particular varicella zoster virus (VZV), measles virus, influenza viruses, hepatitis B virus, and SARS-CoV-2] with the possible ocular adverse effects of their relative vaccines, in order to establish a risk-benefit relationship from an ophthalmological point of view.

No abstract