The sticky silicone oil bubble at the macular region was not related to internal limiting membrane peeling, epiretinal membrane, viscosity, duration, or brand of silicone oil used, but to the use of perfluorooctane.
Purpose. To compare the efficacy of PPV and ILM peel versus PPV and IFT in patients with traumatic FTMH. Methods. Retrospective interventional comparative case series including two groups of patients with traumatic FTMH. Patients were divided into group I (ILM peel) and group II (IFT). The main outcome measure was closure of the macular hole and restoration of the foveal microstructure. The independent-samples T-test and ANOVA test were used to study the mean between 2 groups and calculate the P value, whereas the bivariate correlation procedure studied the interaction between the variables tested. Results. Group I included 28 patients. Mean preoperative MLD was 757 µm. Mean preoperative BCVA was approximately 20/320. Group II included 12 patients. Mean preoperative MLD was 529.5 µm. Mean preoperative BCVA was 20/320. Group I had a macular hole closure rate of 75% versus 92% in group II P=0.05. Mean BCVA improvement was 2.5 lines in group I versus 5 lines in group II P=0.02. Disrupted ELM and IS/OS was the most salient finding in both groups. Conclusion. IFT has a significantly superior anatomic and functional outcome compared to ILM peel in traumatic FTMH.
PurposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety of high-dose intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) as affordable low-cost alternative to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-vascular endothelial growth factor [anti-VEGF] agents) in lower-middle-income countries.Patients and methodsThis was a retrospective interventional non-comparative case series. The study recruited patients who received 20 mg IVTA for treating various retinal and optic nerve diseases over the past 5 years. Main outcome measure was assessment of complications secondary to high-dose IVTA. The crosstabs procedure was used to display the interaction between the variables tested. The ANOVA test was used to analyze the differences among group means.ResultsThe study included 207 eyes of 168 patients. The main indication for high-dose IVTA were diabetic macular edema 64%, and macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion 19%. The mean follow-up period post-injection was 22 months. Mean number of injections was 1.3. Cataract developed in 54% of eyes. Glaucoma developed in 18.5% of eyes. Glaucoma surgery for intractable glaucoma attributed to high-dose IVTA was needed in 1% of eyes. Endophthalmitis and retinal detachment developed in one patient each.ConclusionHigh-dose IVTA is a safe and cost-effective alternative to anti-VEGF agents. Cataract formation and intraocular pressure rise do not pose major adverse effects when weighed against the risk of vision loss due to inability to afford anti-VEGF treatment.
PurposeTo evaluate the efficacy of transepithelial corneal collagen crosslinking (TE-CXL) in patients with progressive keratoconus.Patients and methodsThis is a prospective interventional consecutive study carried out on 30 eyes of 18 patients with progressive keratoconus who underwent TE-CLX using both ParaCel™ (riboflavin 0.25%, hydroxy propyl methyl cellulose, NaCl, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid [EDTA], Tris, and benzalkonium chloride) and vibeX-Xtra (riboflavin 0.22%, phosphate-buffered saline solution). The procedure was carried out at Ebsar Eye Center in Egypt in the period from 2012 to 2014. The follow-up visits were scheduled on days 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after treatment.ResultsThere were statistically significant improvements (P<0.001) in the mean best-corrected visual acuity (0.54±0.22 preoperatively vs 0.61±0.19 at 12 months postoperatively), the mean manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE; −6.16±3.90 diopters [D] preoperatively and −5.91±3.72 D at 12 months postoperatively), and the mean preoperative corneal astigmatism (−3.39±2.11 D preoperatively and −2.46±2.60 D at 12 months postoperatively).ConclusionTE-CXL could halt the progression of keratoconus in adult patients. TE-CXL resulted in a statistically significant improvement in best-corrected visual acuity, manifest refraction, refractive and corneal astigmatism and K values in keratoconus patients at the 12-month follow-up. Larger sample sizes and longer follow-ups are required in order to make meaningful conclusions.
Background: Silicone oil (SO) is used as an intravitreal tamponade agent in vitreoretinal surgery for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) complicated by proliferative vitreoretinopathy or with large, multiple retinal tears. Usually, SO is left in the eye for at least 3 months. Although its use can lead to well-known complications, intraocular SO is generally well tolerated. Some studies have reported unexpected central vision loss after SO use or removal. Objective: To investigate and analyze the reason for visual loss after the use or removal of intraocular SO in patients who underwent vitrectomy surgeries for RRD. Patients and Methods: A retrospective observational case series of 12 patients with macula-on RRD who reported visual loss after the use or removal of SO was reviewed. Investigations carried out included fundus fluorescein angiography, optical coherence tomography (OCT) of the macula and optic disc, perimetry, and electrophysiological study. Electrolyte levels were measured in retro-oil fluid and compared with their levels in the vitreous humor of patients who underwent vitrectomy for macular holes, floaters, dropped intraocular lenses, or dropped crystalline lens fragments. Results: Visual acuity levels dropped by at least 2 Snellen chart lines. None of the 12 cases had macular detachment at any stage. Fundus fluorescein angiography and OCT results were unremarkable in most of the cases. Mean levels of electrolytes in retro-oil fluids and vitreous humor were similar. Conclusion: Visual loss is a possible complication after SO use or removal. This still remains a mysterious issue which needs further research and investigation.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.