Purpose : To assess perceptions and implications of COVID-19 across the spectrum of visual impairment (VI) and normally-sighted individuals Design : Prospective cross-sectional comparative study. Method : XXXXXX Setting : Institutional. Patients : 232 patients and their caregivers. Four groups were created based on better eye characteristics: blind (best-corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA) < 3/60 or visual field < 10 central degrees), severe VI (3/60 ≤ BCDVA < 6/60, vertical cup-to-disc ratio ≥ 0.85 or neuroretinal rim width ≤ 0.1), moderate VI (6/60 ≤ BCDVA < 6/18), or no/mild VI (controls, BCDVA ≥ 6/18) based on International Classification of Diseases-10 criteria and Foster and Quigley's consensus definition of glaucoma. Procedure : Telephone questionnaires. Main Outcomes and Measures : Differences in perceptions and implications of COVID-19 across various levels of VI. Caregiver perceptions were a secondary outcome measure. Results : Survey was completed by 232 participants, with 58 participants in each VI group. Mean age was 58.9 years ± 13.2. Greater degrees of VI were associated with older age (P=0.008) and lower education level (P=0.046). Blind participants more commonly perceived vision as a risk factor for contracting COVID-19 (P=0.045), were concerned about access to healthcare (P<0.001), obtained news through word of mouth (P<0.001), and less commonly wore masks (P=0.003). Controls more commonly performed frequent handwashing (P=0.001), were aware of telemedicine (P=0.029), and had fewer concerns about social interactions (P=0.020) compared to groups with substantial VI. All caregivers reported more frequent patient care since COVID-19 began. Conclusions : The pandemic may have a disproportionate impact on the visually-impaired, and evidence-based assessments of COVID-19 health outcomes in this population are warranted.

No abstract

No abstract

Microinvasive glaucoma surgeries (MIGSs) are new surgical procedures for treatment of glaucoma. They aim to safely and effectively reduce intraocular pressure (IOP) with minimal trauma to the eye and less complications. The first-generation iStent is the first approved ab interno MIGS implant for management of open-angle glaucoma. It works by allowing aqueous humor to drain directly from the anterior chamber into Schlemm canal bypassing the trabecular meshwork, the major site of outflow resistance. The second-generation iStent inject is the smallest available trabecular device that occupies less than 0.5 mm. It is designed to facilitate the surgical technique and allow simultaneous implantation of 2 stents, aiming for more IOP reduction. This review examines publications about the iStent inject, focusing on the device's efficacy, safety, and comparison with the first generation iStent. Both devices were found to be a safe and effective tool in management of open-angle glaucoma.

No abstract

To describe reoperations that occurred within 90 days of minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) at a single institution over a 30-month period.Setting: Tertiary care hospital.Design: Retrospective case series.Methods: Charts of adult patients who underwent trabecular microbypass stents, gel microstents, and goniotomy procedures (including gonioscopy-assisted transluminal trabeculotomy) from October 1, 2017, to March 15, 2020, at Wills Eye Hospital were examined. Outcome measures were unanticipated reoperations within the first 90 days after MIGS procedures and the complications that led to these reoperations.Results: A total of 448 MIGS procedures were performed on 436 eyes of 348 patients over a 30-month period by 6 glaucoma surgeons. Of these, 206 (46.0%) were trabecular microbypass stents (198 iStent/iStent inject and 8 Hydrus), 152 (33.9%) were gel microstents, and 90 (20.1%) were goniotomy procedures. Combined phacoemulsification took place in 256 eyes (58.7%). Reoperation within 90 days took place in 23 (5.3%) of 436 eyes, including 16 (10.5%) of 152 eyes in the gel microstent group, 4 (2.0%) of 198 eyes in iStent/iStent inject group, and 3 (3.3%) of 90 eyes in the goniotomy group. Indications for reoperation were elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) in 16 (69.6%) of 23 eyes, gel microstent tip exposure with wound leakage in 3 (13.0%) of 23 eyes, and early gel microstent encapsulation without elevated IOP in 1 (4.3%) of 23 eyes. Two (8.7%) of 23 eyes required reoperation for intraocular lens complications, whereas 1 (4.3%) of 23 eyes had elevated IOP and aphakia requiring reoperation. Conclusions:The rate of reoperation within the first 90 days after MIGS was low. Elevated IOP and complications associated with gel microstents were the main indications for reoperation.

No abstract

No abstract