Abstract-Combat blast is an important cause of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in the Department of Veterans Affairs polytrauma population, whereas common causes of TBI in the civilian sector include motor vehicle accidents and falls. Known visual consequences of civilian TBI include compromised visual acuity, visual fields, and oculomotor function. The visual consequences of TBI related to blast remain largely unknown. Blast injury may include open globe (eye) injury, which is usually detected and managed early in the rehabilitation journey. The incidence, locations, and types of ocular damage in eyes without open globe injury after exposure to powerful blast have not been systematically studied. Initial reports and preliminary data suggest that binocular function, visual fields, and other aspects of visual function may be impaired after blast-related TBI, despite relatively normal visual acuity. Damage to the ocular tissues may occur from blunt trauma without rupture or penetration (closed globe injury). Possible areas for research are development of common taxonomy and assessment tools across services, surgical management, and outcomes for blast-related eye injury; the incidence, locations, and natural history of closed globe injury; binocular and visual function impairment; quality of life in affected servicemembers; pharmacological and visual therapies; and practice patterns for screening, management, and rehabilitation.

Abstract-Little is known about the visual function deficits associated with polytrauma injury. In this retrospective descriptive study, we examined the records of a clinic established to assess visual function in patients experiencing deployment-related polytrauma. We describe the clinical findings and present a vision examination protocol that may be useful for screening polytrauma patients in other settings. Data from our sample suggested that self-reported vision complaints were common (74%) and confirmed that visual impairment occurred in 38% of all cases. When examining the mechanism of injury, we found that polytrauma due to blast injuries appeared to more than double the risk of visual impairment compared with all other polytrauma causes (i.e., motor vehicle accidents, gunshot and/or shrapnel, assault, falls, or anoxia). The rate of visual impairment in blast-related injury was 52% compared with 20% for all other sources of injury. Visual complaints and impairments were common in the polytrauma patients studied. This finding suggests that comprehensive eye examinations should be routinely administered, particularly when the mechanism of injury involves a blast.

No abstract

The majority of primary lymphoproliferative lesions of the uvea represent low-grade B cell lymphomas and often display a prominent plasmacellular differentiation. The purpose of the current study was to classify the uveal lymphoproliferations according to the REAL classification; examine the immune profile of the plasmacellular differentiated tumour cells using the plasma cell-related antigens multiple myeloma oncogene-1-protein (MUM1), Vs38c, CD38 and CD138; and to compare this profile with that of mature reactive plasma cells. Following fixation, 13 lymphoproliferative lesions of the uvea were categorized on the basis of their morphology and immunophenotype according to the REAL classification. Included in the immunohistochemistry were B cell-specific activator protein (BSAP), MUM1, Vs38c, CD38 and CD138. Nested polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was also performed on DNA extracted from paraffin sections for the detection of gene rearrangements of the heavy immunoglobulin chain (IgH). All of the 13 uveal tract lymphoproliferative lesions represented malignant lymphoma of B cell non-Hodgkin type and could be diagnosed as 'extranodal marginal zone B cell lymphomas' (EMZL). The degree of plasmacellular differentiation varied between the tumours. In contrast to their non-plasmacytoid counterparts, the 'plasmacytoid' EMZL tumour cells were negative for the B cell markers CD20 and BSAP, and demonstrated heterogeneous positivity for the markers MUM1, Vs38c, CD38 and CD138. The most consistent marker was MUM1, being observed in all tumours. Co-expression of all plasma cell markers was observed in four (31%) uveal EMZL. Loss of CD138 expression was observed in six (46%) tumours, of Vs38c expression in five (38%) and of CD38 in one (7%) tumour. Although the diagnosis of malignant lymphoma was unequivocally based on morphological and immunophenotypical features, the molecular analysis was able to demonstrate clonal B cell populations in only one uveal EMZL. All uveal lymphoid proliferations investigated represented EMZL, with the corresponding morphology and immunophenotype as seen in EMZL in other extranodal locations. MUM1, followed by CD38 expression, were the most constant plasma cell antigens in the plasmacytoid EMZL tumour cells, with both Vs38c and CD138 positivity being lost in many tumours. Aberrant immune profiles of plasma cell-related antigens may be of help in the establishment of malignancy in uveal lymphoproliferative lesions, particularly where interpretation of light chain expression and/or PCR results is difficult.

With rising global prevalence of diabetic retinopathy (DR), automated DR screening is needed for primary care settings. Two automated artificial intelligence (AI)-based DR screening algorithms have U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval. Several others are under consideration while in clinical use in other countries, but their real-world performance has not been evaluated systematically. We compared the performance of seven automated AI-based DR screening algorithms (including one FDA-approved algorithm) against human graders when analyzing real-world retinal imaging data. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSThis was a multicenter, noninterventional device validation study evaluating a total of 311,604 retinal images from 23,724 veterans who presented for teleretinal DR screening at the Veterans Affairs (VA) Puget Sound Health Care System (HCS) or Atlanta VA HCS from 2006 to 2018. Five companies provided seven algorithms, including one with FDA approval, that independently analyzed all scans, regardless of image quality. The sensitivity/specificity of each algorithm when classifying images as referable DR or not were compared with original VA teleretinal grades and a regraded arbitrated data set. Value per encounter was estimated. RESULTSAlthough high negative predictive values (82.72-93.69%) were observed, sensitivities varied widely (50.98-85.90%). Most algorithms performed no better than humans against the arbitrated data set, but two achieved higher sensitivities, and one yielded comparable sensitivity (80.47%, P 5 0.441) and specificity (81.28%, P 5 0.195). Notably, one had lower sensitivity (74.42%) for proliferative DR (P 5 9.77 Â 10 À4 ) than the VA teleretinal graders.

Intravitreal antivascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents are widely used to treat ocular conditions but the benefits and harms of these treatments are uncertain. We conducted a systematic review to compare the effects of aflibercept, bevacizumab and ranibizumab on best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) changes, quality of life and ocular or systemic adverse events in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (NVAMD), diabetic macular oedema (DME) and central or branch retinal vein occlusion (RVO). We searched published and unpublished literature sources to February 2017 for randomised controlled trials and cohort or modelling studies reporting comparative costs in the USA. Two reviewers extracted data and graded the strength of the evidence using established methods. Of 17 included trials, none reported a clinically important difference (≥ 5 letters) in visual acuity gains between agents. Nine trials provide high-strength evidence of no difference between bevacizumab and ranibizumab for NVAMD. Three trials provide moderate-strength evidence of no difference between bevacizumab and ranibizumab for DME. There was low-strength evidence of similar effects between aflibercept and ranibizumab for NVAMD, aflibercept and bevacizumab for RVO and all three agents for DME. There was insufficient evidence to compare bevacizumab and ranibizumab for RVO. Rates of ocular adverse events were low, and systemic harms were generally similar between groups, although 1 DME trial reported more arterial thrombotic events with ranibizumab versus aflibercept. Overall, no agent had a clear advantage over another for effectiveness or safety. Aflibercept and ranibizumab were significantly less cost-effective than repackaged bevacizumab in two trials. Systematic review registration number: CRD42016034076.

No abstract

No abstract