In the past decades, cases of canine ocular onchocercosis have been reported worldwide, particularly in the United States and Europe. Onchocerca lupi, originally described from a wolf, has been implicated in some of these cases, and its zoonotic role has been hypothesized on the basis of the reexamination of two cases of human ocular onchocerciasis. In the present study, we describe, for the first time, the occurrence of O. lupi in the subconjunctival region of the human eye in a patient from Turkey. The nematode was identified as O. lupi based on its morphology and molecular phylogenetic analysis of partial cox1 and 12S ribosomal DNA genes. The results suggest that O. lupi should be considered in the differential diagnosis of other eye parasitic infections in humans. The role of dogs as natural hosts of O. lupi and the vectors of this zoonotic parasite need to be investigated.
There was significant thinning of the macular GC-IPL in the absence of clinically evident HCQ-related retinopathy and VF abnormalities. Measurements of the macular GC-IPL thickness using SD-OCT may therefore be useful in the early diagnosis and in monitoring the progression of retinal changes in patients receiving long-term HCQ therapy.
Objectives. This study compared the macular and retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) thicknesses and optic nerves of eyes with reduced vision due to anisometropia with the contralateral healthy eyes in adults using optical coherence tomography (OCT). Methods. This cross-sectional study was conducted in Atatürk State Hospital, Sinop, Turkey. Macular and RNFL thicknesses, optic nerve disc area, cup area, and horizontal and vertical cup-to-disc ratios obtained using a NIDEK RS-3000 SLO spectral domain OCT device were compared between the amblyopic and fellow eyes in 30 adults with anisometropic amblyopia 18–55 years old who were seen in our clinic with unilateral poor vision. Results. The mean macular thickness was 266.90 ± 23.22 µm in the amblyopic eyes and 263.90 ± 22.84 µm in the fellow eyes, and the mean RNFL thickness was 111.90 ± 12.9 and 109.70 ± 9.42 µm, respectively. The two thicknesses did not differ significantly between the amblyopic and fellow eyes. There were also no significant differences between the eyes in disc area, cup area, and horizontal-vertical cup/disc ratios. Conclusion. There does not seem to be a difference in macular thickness, peripapillary RNFL, or optic disc structures between the amblyopic and fellow eyes in adults.
Aim. To compare the clinical performance of the Spot Vision Screener used to detect amblyopia risk factors (ARFs) in children before and after induction of cycloplegia; the children were referred because they met the screening criteria of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus (AAPOS). Methods. The Spot Vision Screener and a standard autorefractometer were used to examine 200 eyes of 100 children aged 3–10 years, before and after cycloplegia induction, in terms of ARFs. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for the detection of significant refractive errors were measured using the AAPOS referral criteria. It was explored that Spot Screener data were affected by cycloplegia. The extent of agreement between cycloplegic/noncycloplegic photoscreening data and cycloplegic autorefraction measurements was assessed using Wilcoxon and Spearman correlation analyses. Results. The Spot’s sensitivity was improved from 60.9% to 85.3% and specificity from 94.9% to 87.4% with cycloplegia compared to cycloplegic standard autorefractometer results. The positive predictive value of Spot was 75.7%, and the negative predictive value was 90.4% without cycloplegia. With cycloplegia, the positive predictive value of Spot was 63.6% and the negative predictive value was 95.8%. Conclusions. The Spot Screener afforded moderate sensitivity and high specificity prior to cycloplegia. The sensitivity and negative predictive value improved after induction of cycloplegia. Examiners should be aware of the effects of cycloplegia on their findings.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.