Purpose Several studies have reported conflicting results on ocular manifestations and transmission of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) whose causative virus, SARS-CoV-2, belongs to the coronavirus family, the seventh recognized as a human pathogen and the third causing a severe clinical syndrome. COVID-19 primarily affects the lungs, similar to the other human coronaviruses. Comparing the relation between the animal-to-human transmitted coronaviruses (SARS-CoV-1, SARS-Cov-2, MERS-CoV, CoV-229E, NL63, OC43, HKU1) and the eye may contribute to determining their actual eye-tissue tropism and risk of ocular transmission. Methods Literature review was conducted via Pubmed.gov, Google Scholar and medRixv using the following keywords: COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV-1, MERS-CoV, CoV-229E, NL63, OC43, HKU1, conjunctivitis, tear swab, ocular expression, ocular symptoms and human angiotensin converting enzyme-2 expression. Studies with lack in methodology were excluded. Results Sixteen observational studies were selected. The range for detection of viral RNA in tears was 0-8% for SARS-CoV-1 and 0-5.3% for SARS-CoV-2, while no reports were found for other coronaviruses. Ocular manifestations have been reported for NL63 and SARS-CoV-2. Ocular symptoms in the form of conjunctivitis/conjunctival congestion predominantly were detected in 65 (3.17%) out of 2048 reported patients with COVID-19 (range of 0.8-32%). Eye symptoms were not reported for the other coronaviruses. Conclusions Data aggregation for coronaviruses shows a relatively low eye-tissue tropism. Conjunctival congestion is an uncommon manifestation of COVID-19 similar to all human coronaviruses' infections. In a low percentage of patients, the virus can be excreted in ocular fluids at different stages of the infection, regardless of positive SARS-Cov-2 throat swab. Albeit high viral loads in ocular tissue seem to have relatively low prevalence, the eye should be

BACKGROUNDEnucleation and evisceration are eye removal procedures considered as palliative treatment when all other therapeutic options are exhausted.OBJECTIVEDescribe the causes and histopathological findings leading to enucleation/evisceration, and correlate the clinical findings with the histopathological findings.DESIGNRetrospective, descriptive study.SETTINGSTertiary care hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.PATIENTS AND METHODSThe medical records of patients who underwent enucleation or evisceration from February 2005 to May 2015 were reviewed. Patients were classified into two categories based on indications of surgery: traumatic and nontraumatic. Causes of ocular injury in the traumatic group were documented, and the histopathological findings were reviewed for the nontraumatic cases.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)Number of enucleation and evisceration surgeries and their causes and histopathological findings.RESULTSOne hundred ten patients underwent evisceration (n=69, 63%) and enucleation (n=41, 37%). Causes were traumatic in 38 (35%) and nontraumatic in 72 (65%). The median age was 50 years and there were 64 men and 46 women. Postoperative endophthalmitis was the most common indication for surgery (n=24, 21.8%), followed by painful blind eye (n=22, 20%). Ocular trauma was more predominant in men (n=29, 76%) than in women (n=9, 24%), and the leading mechanism of trauma was metallic nail injuries (n= 6, 15.8%). In the nontraumatic group, endophthalmitis was the most common histopathological finding (n= 25, 34.7%).CONCLUSIONSThe majority of the eye enucleation/evisceration surgeries were due to nontraumatic causes, especially postoperative infections. However, severe eye trauma was still a main indication for this destructive procedure. Guidelines are needed to decrease the incidence/severity of work-related eye injuries and to detect and manage eye infections earlier and more promptly.LIMITATIONSRetrospective study, in one hospital in one area; therefore, results cannot be generalized.

No abstract

AIMS: To evaluate the refractive status of young Saudi schoolchildren with a “Spot Screener.” SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted from January to July 2016 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Children of kindergarten (3–5 years) and grades 1 and 2 (6–7 years) were screened for refractive error (RE) using the handheld Spot Screener (Welch Allyn, Skaneateles Falls, NY, USA). Data were collected on age, gender, and spectacle use. The pass/fail notation from the Spot Screener and the RE were documented. Children with a “fail” were re-tested with an autorefractor (AR). The rate of agreement was evaluated for the spherical equivalent (SE) from the Spot Screener and AR. RESULTS: We examined 300 schoolchildren and 114 preschool children. The prevalence of RE was 22% in schoolchildren and 25% in preschoolers. There were 183 (61%) hyperopes, 110 (36.7%) myopes, 6 (2%) emmetropes, and 29 (9.7%) astigmats (>2 D cylinder) in grade 1 and 2. There were 85 (74.6%) hyperopes, 22 (19.3%) myopes, 7 (6.1%) emmetropes, and 10 (8.8%) astigmats among preschoolers. The SE differed between the AR and the Spot Screener in 17 (28%) children of 61 failed Spot Screener tests. Accommodation (9, 53%) and high astigmatism (8, 47%) were the main underlying causes of the difference. The Spot Screener could identify RE for the first time in 51 (17%) schoolchildren and 26 (22%) preschoolers. End-users suggested that Spot Screener was child-friendly and quick to test RE. CONCLUSIONS: The Spot Screener could be a good initial screening tool for RE in young schoolchildren.

Patient: Male, 42-year-old Final Diagnosis: Ocular albinism Symptoms: Vision loss Medication: — Clinical Procedure: — Specialty: Ophthalmology Objective: Rare disease Background: Retinal vasoproliferative tumor (VPT) is a type of ocular vascular tumor that commonly occurs idiopathically and can be associated with secondary ocular diseases. Ocular albinism is an X-linked inherited disease and distinguished from oculocutaneous albinism by less hair and skin involvement. Case Report: A 42-year-old man with ocular albinism and moderate myopia presented with a history of insidious decrease in vision in both eyes over a period of months. On examination, the horizontal pendular nystagmus was present and diffuse iris transillumination defects were observed bilaterally. A fundus examination revealed a de-pigmented fundus with visible choroidal vessels, foveal hypoplasia, and a unilateral, elevated, vascular lesion in the superotemporal aspect of the retinal periphery. Optical coherence tomography of the lesion confirmed the retinal location and fluorescein fundus angiography indicated its vascular nature. B-scan ultrasonography was performed to measure the dimensions of the lesion. Conclusions: Rare retinal VPT has been reported with systemic and ocular associations, but it has never been reported in the literature in association with ocular albinism. Multiple treatment modalities have been described for the tumor, but observation can be considered in the absence of secondary consequences of the VPT. Retinal VPT should be included in the differential diagnosis of any retinal vascular abnormalities in patients with ocular albinism.