SUMMARY OBJECTIVES To bring summarized information about what has been published so far regarding Covid-19, facilitating the access to information and a better understanding of this pandemic, and to contribute to the medical community in the decision-making against this virus. METHODS This review article brings collected information from different articles published since the beginning of the pandemic of the 2019 novel coronavirus. KEY RESULTS This paper aggregates and consolidates some epidemiological parameters and clinical knowledge about the novel coronavirus and brings what is new in the search for pandemic control. MAJOR CONCLUSIONS Governments and health authorities are under increased pressure to control the COVID-19 spreading. In this scenario, the scientific community is working hard to produce relevant papers which will help in the next steps against coronavirus. Our review summarized the latest news about SARS-CoV2, evidencing what we know about COVID-19 until now.

Background The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) can cause acute respiratory distress syndrome with dyspnea, anosmia, fever, and cough. Few studies describing ocular findings have been reported. The current case series, reports the clinical findings and natural history of patients with retinal vascular occlusion after COVID-19 infection. Case presentations Patients from multiple Brazilian hospitals who had clinical and laboratory diagnoses of COVID-19 with retinal vein or arterial occlusion were analyzed retrospectively. The baseline demographics, clinical presentations of COVID-19, comorbidities, risk factors for thromboembolic events, and use of anticoagulant drugs were reviewed. The relevant clinical findings associated with the retinal vascular occlusive event, management, and outcomes were reported. Fourteen cases of retinal vascular occlusion within 3 months of the laboratory confirmed COVID-19 infection were identified. Three of which required hospitalization for COVID-19 management. Eight cases had central retinal vein occlusion, three branch retinal vein occlusion, one hemispheric retinal vein occlusion, and two central arterial occlusion. The mean patient age at presentation was 48 years; the visual acuity ranged from light perception to 20/20. Nine patients received intravitreal injections of anti-angiogenic drugs and one received ketorolac tromethamine drops for the management of secondary macular edema; four were untreated. Conclusions COVID-19 patients may rarely have ocular manifestations of the disease. It was presented a case series of vascular occlusion events that may be related to COVID-19 infection, since these thrombotic events are actively involved in the disease pathophysiology. These cases emphasize the need for further investigation of ocular complications associated with this disease.

Purpose: To investigate the effect of vitreomacular adhesion (VMA) on the outcome of antiangiogenic treatment for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Methods: Ninety-nine eyes of 83 patients were used in our cohort study. We prospectively evaluated best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal thickness (CRT) in patients with neovascular AMD at baseline and 1, 2, 3, 6, and 12 months after treatment with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents. All patients were stratified by spectral domain optical coherence tomography into 2 groups (i.e., VMA[+] and VMA[-]) according to the presence or absence of VMA, and the response to treatment was evaluated. Results: Fifty-four eyes (54.5%) were included in the VMA(-) group and 45 eyes (45.5%) comprised the VMA(+) group. In paired comparisons of mean BCVA between baseline and each follow-up visit (1, 2, 3, 6, and 12 months), the VMA(-) group showed statistically significant improvement at 1, 2, and 3 months compared to baseline, and BCVA significantly improved only at 3 months in the VMA(+) group. For both groups, paired comparisons of CRT showed a statistically significant decrease when data obtained at 1, 2, 3, 6, and 12 months were compared to baseline values (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Posterior VMA is associated with a worse short-term outcome in patients with neovascular AMD treated with anti-VEGF agents.

IntroductionThe gold standard in functional glaucoma evaluation is standard automated perimetry (SAP). However, SAP depends on the reliability of the patients’ responses and other external factors; therefore, other technologies have been developed for earlier detection of visual field changes in glaucoma patients. The frequency-doubling perimetry (FDT) is believed to detect glaucoma earlier than SAP. The multifocal visual evoked potential (mfVEP) is an objective test for functional evaluation.ObjectiveTo evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of FDT and mfVEP tests in normal, suspect, and glaucomatous eyes and compare the monocular and interocular mfVEP.MethodsNinety-five eyes from 95 individuals (23 controls, 33 glaucoma suspects, 39 glaucomatous) were enrolled. All participants underwent a full ophthalmic examination, followed by SAP, FDT, and mfVEP tests.ResultsThe area under the curve for mean deviation and pattern standard deviation were 0.756 and 0.761, respectively, for FDT, 0.564 and 0.512 for signal and alpha for interocular mfVEP, and 0.568 and 0.538 for signal and alpha for monocular mfVEP. This difference between monocular and interocular mfVEP was not significant.ConclusionThe FDT Matrix was superior to mfVEP in glaucoma detection. The difference between monocular and interocular mfVEP in the diagnosis of glaucoma was not significant.

No abstract

Purpose: Glaucomatous neuropathy can be a consequence of insufficient blood supply, increase in intraocular pressure (IOP), or other risk factors that diminish the ocular blood flow. To determine the ocular perfusion pressure (OPP) in normal and systemic hypertensive patients.Materials and methods: One hundred and twenty-one patients were enrolled in this prospective and comparative study and underwent a complete ophthalmologic examination including slit lamp examination, Goldmann applanation tonometry, stereoscopic fundus examination, and pulsatile ocular blood flow (POBF) measurements. The OPP was calculated as being the medium systemic arterial pressure (MAP) less the IOP. Only right eye values were considered for calculations using Student’s t-test.Results: The mean age of the patients was 57.5 years (36-78), and 68.5% were women. There was a statistically significant difference in the OPP of the normal and systemic hypertensive patients (p < 0.05). The difference in the OPP between these groups varied between 8.84 and 17.9 mm Hg.Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that although the systemic hypertensive patients have a higher OPP in comparison to normal patients, this increase does not mean that they also have a higher OBF (as measured by POBF tonograph). This may be caused by chronic changes in the vascular network and in the blood hemodynamics in patients with systemic hypertension.How to cite this article: Kanadani FN, Figueiredo CR, Miranda RM, Cunha PLT, Kanadani TCM, Dorairaj S. Ocular Perfusion Pressure and Pulsatile Ocular Blood Flow in Normal and Systemic Hypertensive Patients. J Curr Glaucoma Pract 2015;9(1):16-19.

Purpose: We aimed to assess the subfoveal choroidal thickness (SFChT) and the effect of treatment with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents on the SFChT in age-related macular degeneration (AMD) subtypes. Methods: We enrolled 128 eyes of 107 patients with neovascular AMD (60 women; 47 men; mean age, 73.6 ± 8.9 years), and prospectively evaluated the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and SFChT at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months after treatment with anti-VEGF agents. Patients were assigned to the typical AMD, polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV), and retinal angiomatous proliferation (RAP) subgroups. Results: In total, 85 (66.4%), 31 (24.2%), and 12 (9.4%) eyes were assigned to the typical AMD, PCV, and RAP subgroups, respectively. The baseline mean BCVA was 0.75 ± 0.26, 0.72 ± 0.21, and 0.77 ± 0.24 logMAR in the typical AMD, PCV, and RAP subgroups, respectively (p = 0.774). The mean baseline SFChT was 203.20 ± 35.80, 271.80 ± 24.50, and 182.93 ± 31.31 µm, respectively (p < 0.001). Mean SFChT significantly decreased from baseline to 3, 6, and 12 months after treatment. The RAP subtype presented a significantly higher decrease in SFChT compared to the other subtypes (p = 0.01). The percentage reduction in SFChT was not significantly correlated with the number of injections (r = –0.02; p = 0.823). No association was observed between baseline SFChT and final visual acuity at 12 months (r = 0.0; p = 0.586). Conclusions: SFChT was greatest in eyes with PCV and least in eyes with RAP. The reduction in SFChT after treatment was greater in the RAP cases. The decrease in SFChT after 12 months of anti-VEGF treatment was not associated with the number of injections and there was no correlation between the baseline SFChT and visual acuity in all AMD subtypes.

No abstract