Purpose: To evaluate the visual acuity, defocus curve and visual quality of life following bilateral implantation of a new hybrid extended depth of focus (EDOF)-multifocal diffractive intraocular lens (IOL). Methods: Patients who underwent cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of Tecnis Synergy IOL were enrolled in this study. The main outcomes were defined as uncorrected distant, intermediate and near visual acuities (UDVA, UIVA and UNVA, respectively), defocus curve and VF-14 questionnaire aimed for visual performance. Results: The mean ± SD values for binocular UDVA, UIVA and UNVA were −0.01 ± 0.04, 0.05 ± 0.03 and 0.03 ± 0.05 logMAR, respectively. Defocus curve showed a continuous vision above 0.16 logMAR between +0.50 D and −2.50 D. Patients had good visual performance with mean VF-14 scores above 3 points. Driving at night (3.47 ± 0.64) was found to be the most difficult task to perform. Spectacle independence was 100% for both distant and near vision. Conclusion: Bilateral implantation of Tecnis Synergy IOL in cataract patients shows good visual acuity and performance, covering a good visual range without any need of spectacles.

Objective Blood pressure variability (BPV) is considered as a novel risk factor for cardiovascular disease including left ventricular hypertrophy, vascular stiffness, and renal dysfunction. In this study, we aimed to determine the relationship between ambulatory BPV with subclinical organ damage and vascular stiffness parameters in normotensive healthy subjects. Methods A total of 100 healthy subjects over 18 years of age were included in this cross-sectional study. We divided the participants into two groups according to the median value of the SD of mean 24-h blood pressure (BP) (Group 1: SD of mean 24-h BP <10.15 and Group 2: SD of mean 24-h BP >10.15). BPs of these subjects were recorded over a 24-h period using ambulatory BP monitoring. Mobil-O-Graph device was used to estimate the augmentation index (AIx), pulse wave velocity (PWV), and ambulatory BP measurement. The choroidal thickness was measured by using optical coherence tomography device. Results The mean age of the patients was 25.4 ± 5.0 years. Choroidal thickness was correlated with PWV, AIx, protein excretion, and SD of systolic and diastolic BP (P < 0.05). Additionally, participants with higher BP variability have lower choroidal thickness and higher AIx. Conclusion We showed that even in normotensive subjects, BPV correlates with choroid thickness. Thus, BPV can be an early prognostic parameter for pathologic vascular changes.

Purpose: To investigate the repeatability of choroidal vascularity index (CVI) measurements in centered and decentered (regarding pupil entry position of the beam) directional subfoveal optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans with (CVI1) and without (CVI2) brightness adjustment. Methods: Thirty-two eyes of 32 healthy volunteers were included in this prospective study. First, the fovea was evaluated by a single horizontal enhanced depth imaging OCT scan in a centered direction. Then, the same subfoveal horizontal line was scanned in a decentered direction. The agreement between CVIs obtained from these centered and decentered directional OCT scans was investigated using Bland–Altman analysis and intraclass correlation coefficient. Results: Intraclass correlation coefficient between centered and decentered CVI1 was 0.71 (95% CI: 0.48–0.85, P value < 0.001). Intraclass correlation coefficient between centered and decentered CVI2 was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.5–0.86, P value < 0.001). The mean difference between centered and decentered directional measurements for CVI1 and CVI2 were 0.5 and 0.8, respectively. Conclusion: There is moderate agreement between CVIs obtained from centered and decentered directional single OCT scans of the same subfoveal area. Studies investigating choroidal vascularity should be standardized by using the same OCT beam direction in all scans.

Objectives: To investigate the effect of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the clinical practice of ophthalmologists in our country. Materials and Methods: A questionnaire consisting of 22 questions was delivered to 250 ophthalmologists via e-mail and a smartphone messaging application. A total of 113 ophthalmologists completed the survey. The questions included the participants’ demographic data (age, years in practice, institution, and city), changes in their working conditions and institutional preventive measures implemented during the pandemic, their personal COVID-19 experiences, the prevalence of telemedicine applications, and their attitudes toward these practices. Results: Nearly half (47.8%) of the 113 ophthalmologists were 36 to 45 years old. In terms of years in practice, the largest proportion of respondents (28.3%) had 6-10 years of experience. Most of the participants worked in private/foundation universities (37.2%), while 22.1% worked in education and research clinics. Participants working at public universities most often reported that they or a close contact had to work in COVID wards (89.5%). Triage was performed in 51.5% of ophthalmology outpatient clinics, with 88.0% of these participants reporting that patients with fever, cough, or dyspnea were directed to the pandemic clinic without ophthalmological examination. All participants working in public hospitals, education and research clinics, and public university hospitals had postponed elective surgeries, whereas 12.5% of those working in private practice and 20.5% of those working in private/foundation universities reported that they continued elective surgeries. While 80.8% of the participants did not conduct online interviews or examinations, 40.4% stated that they considered telemedicine applications beneficial. Seventy-seven percent of participants expressed concern about a decrease in their income during the pandemic, with this being especially common among participants working in private practice (87.5%) and private/foundation university hospitals (85.7%). Conclusion: Ophthalmologists across our country have been affected by this pandemic at a level that will change their clinical approach. We think that ophthalmologists impacted by the difficulty of providing personal protective equipment and economic concerns should be supported more during the pandemic.

No abstract