Background: Phacoemulsification surgery may have beneficial effects on the quality of life of patients with senile cataract. These effects can be evaluated with the help of questionnaires and tests. Purpose: To evaluate the effect of the phacoemulsification surgery on the vision-related quality of life (VR-QOL) in patients with senile cataract using the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ-25) and functional independence measure (FIM) tests. Methods: The data collection was prospective. NEI-VFQ-25 and FIM tests were measured by a masked ergo-therapist. The patients who underwent phacoemulsification surgery were included in this study. Mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), NEI-VFQ-25 and FIM scores were compared in the preoperative period and at least 3 months after the surgery according to demographic properties including gender, age, education status, as well as the BCVA level and laterality. Results: Preoperative mean BCVA and NEI-VFQ-25 composite scores improved significantly ( p < 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively). All NEI-VFQ-25 subscale scores except the general health ( p = 0.235) and driving ( p = 0.226) showed a significant postoperative increase. The postoperative NEI-VFQ-25 composite scores showed a significant increase in all subgroup analyses ( p < 0.05 for all). Patients with poorer BCVA, bilateral surgery, and low education status had lower preoperative NEI-VFQ-25 composite scores than the patients with better BCVA, unilateral surgery, and high education status ( p = 0.026, p = 0.016, and p = 0.032, respectively). All FIM scores were similar in the preoperative and postoperative periods regardless of subgroup analyses ( p > 0.05 for all). Conclusion: Phacoemulsification surgery can provide a satisfying improvement in VR-QOL in patients with cataracts. As a valid and reliable test, the NEI-VFQ-25 scale can be used to measure the visual function after the ocular surgeries.
Background: To evaluate the ocular and imaging findings in cases of Bardet-Biedl syndrome (BBS) with advanced-stage retinal dystrophy.
Materials and Methods:Ophthalmic examinations of patients with clinically proven BBS reported in this retrospective observational study. Optical coherence tomography, fundus autofluorescence (AF) and optical biometry measurements were evaluated in detail.Results: Twenty-eight eyes of 14 patients with BBS were evaluated and compared with those in the control group. The mean age of the patients was 31.7±11.2 years. The mean axial length (AL) of the eye was 22.9±0.9 mm and mean anterior chamber depth (ACD) was 3.01±0.37 mm. Cataract was observed in 17 eyes (68%). The mean central macular thickness (CMT) was 99.1±35.3 μm and the mean subfoveal choroidal thickness (SCT) was 196.1±32.3 μm. The mean AL, ACD, CMT, and SCT all were significantly lower in patients with BBS than in the control group (p<0.001). In all BBS cases, ellipsoid zone and external limiting membrane integrity were partially or completely disturbed. The retinal pigment epithelium and Bruch's membrane were observed to be thinner. In addition, eight eyes (29%) had deposit-like appearances on Bruch's membrane, six eyes (21%) had intraretinal hyper-reflective foci, ten eyes (36%) had internal limiting membrane (ILM) thickening, seven eyes (25%) had epiretinal membrane, three eyes (11%) had ILM wrinkling, three eyes (11%) had hyper-AF ring, and ten eyes (36%) had abnormally hyper-AF patterns with an irregular distribution.
Conclusion:In BBS, ocular pathologies can be seen in the outer retina, intraretinal, vitreoretinal interface, and anterior segment. This study provides insight into the ocular pathologies of BBS and may be useful to evaluate patients with BBS for treatment options.
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.