No abstract

Acanthamoeba, an opportunistic pathogen is known to cause an infection of the cornea, central nervous system, and skin. Acanthamoeba feeds different microorganisms, including potentially pathogenic prokaryotes; some of microbes have developed ways of surviving intracellularly and this may mean that Acanthamoeba acts as incubator of important pathogens. A systematic review of the literature was performed in order to capture a comprehensive picture of the variety of microbial species identified within Acanthamoeba following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Forty-three studies met the inclusion criteria, 26 studies (60.5%) examined environmental samples, eight (18.6%) studies examined clinical specimens, and another nine (20.9%) studies analysed both types of samples. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) followed by gene sequencing was the most common technique used to identify the intracellular microorganisms. Important pathogenic bacteria, such as E. coli, Mycobacterium spp. and P. aeruginosa, were observed in clinical isolates of Acanthamoeba, whereas Legionella, adenovirus, mimivirus, and unidentified bacteria (Candidatus) were often identified in environmental Acanthamoeba. Increasing resistance of Acanthamoeba associated intracellular pathogens to antimicrobials is an increased risk to public health. Molecular-based future studies are needed in order to assess the microbiome residing in Acanthamoeba, as a research on the hypotheses that intracellular microbes can affect the pathogenicity of Acanthamoeba infections.

PurposeTo determine the frequency of different types of spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) scan artifacts and errors in ganglion cell algorithm (GCA) in healthy eyes.MethodsInfrared image, color-coded map and each of the 128 horizontal b-scans acquired in the macular ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer scans using the Cirrus HD-OCT (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA) macular cube 512 × 128 protocol in 30 healthy normal eyes were evaluated. The frequency and pattern of each artifact was determined. Deviation of the segmentation line was classified into mild (less than 10 microns), moderate (10–50 microns) and severe (more than 50 microns). Each deviation, if present, was noted as upward or downward deviation. Each artifact was further described as per location on the scan and zones in the total scan area.ResultsA total of 1029 (26.8%) out of total 3840 scans had scan errors. The most common scan error was segmentation error (100%), followed by degraded images (6.70%), blink artifacts (0.09%) and out of register artifacts (3.3%). Misidentification of the inner retinal layers was most frequent (62%). Upward Deviation of the segmentation line (47.91%) and severe deviation (40.3%) were more often noted. Artifacts were mostly located in the central scan area (16.8%). The average number of scans with artifacts per eye was 34.3% and was not related to signal strength on Spearman correlation (p = 0.36).ConclusionsThis study reveals that image artifacts and scan errors in SD-OCT GCA analysis are common and frequently involve segmentation errors. These errors may affect inner retinal thickness measurements in a clinically significant manner. Careful review of scans for artifacts is important when using this feature of SD-OCT device.

Purpose: The present study's objectives are 1) to describe a novel model of Diabetic Retinopathy Capacity Building (DRCB) for optometrists in the detection of diabetes-related retinal pathology in India and 2) to assess the outcomes of this model by comparing the ability of optometrists to detect these diseases using retinal photographs, vis-à-vis, a specialist ophthalmologist. Methods: The DRCB model for optometrists conducted between August 2016 and August 2018 included training, certification in the screening, and referral guidelines for Diabetic Retinopathy (DR) and hospital-and community-based service delivery. Training included a 7-month long fellowship in DR and mentored participation as cofacilitators in 1-day orientation workshops on DR screening guidelines across India. The sensitivity and specificity of study optometrists in screening for DR by fundus photography were compared to a retina specialist before certification. Results: A total of eight optometrists successfully completed their DR fellowship in the project duration of 24 months. The sensitivity and specificity of detection of any DR were 95 and 79%, any Diabetic macular edema (DME) was 80 and 86%. The sensitivity and specificity of detection of sight threatening DR were 88 and 90% and DME was 72% and 92% respectively. Seven workshops were cofacilitated by study optometrists training 870 optometrists in DR screening guidelines across India. Conclusion: The present DRCB model results advocate for an optometry coordinated DR screening in India. Lessons learnt from this model can be useful in designing community-based task sharing initiatives for optometrists in DR screening.

Single intravitreal injections of 2 mg ziv-aflibercept (0.08 mL) appear to be safe through 1 month.