Current Issue : January - March Volume : 2017 Issue Number : 1 Articles : 7 Articles
Purpose: To compare the visual and refractive outcomes, patient satisfaction and spectacle independence\nbetween three novel designs of diffractive IOLs. Method: Prospective study including\n150 patients with implantation of three IOLs: trifocal diffractive IOL AT LISA tri 839 MP (ATLISA, n\n= 50), trifocal diffractive IOL PhysIOL FineVision (FineVision, n = 50) and the extended range of vision\nIOL Tecnis Symfony ZRX00 (Symfony, n = 50). Patients were followed up for 6 months after\nsurgery. Major parameters were monocular and binocular uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected\n(CDVA) distance, uncorrected (UIVA) and distance corrected (DCIVA) intermediate (80 cm), and\nuncorrected (UNVA) and distance corrected (DCNVA) near (40 cm) visual acuities (UNVA), contrast\nsensitivity (CS), defocus curve as well as patient satisfaction and spectacle use. Results: Mean\npostoperative decimal UDVA was 1.01 for Symfony, 0.96 for ATLISA and 0.95 for the FineVision\nIOL. Postoperative UIVA was 0.95 with Symfony, 0.72 with ATLISA and 0.85 with the FineVision\nIOL. Postoperative UNVA was 0.96 with the FineVision, 0.72 with the ATLISA and 0.63 with the\nSymfony IOL. The Symfony defocus curve showed the smoothest profile. Mean mesopic CS was 0.84\nlog units with the Symfony, 0.83 with the ATLISA (0.83) and 0.65 with the FineVision IOL. Mean\nphotopic CS with the Symfony, ATLISA and FineVision was 1.05, 0.85 and 0.69 log units, respectively.\nTwenty percent of the patients with the ATLISA and FineVision IOLs and 5.6% of the Symfony\npatients reported halos and glare as troublesome or disabling. Reading glasses were frequently\nused by 5.6% of the Symfony patients. All patients with the trifocal IOLs reported to be\nspectacle-free for any distance. Conclusion: All 3 IOLs produce excellent results with high levels of\nspectacle independence. The Symfony produces better levels of distance and intermediate visual\nacuity, whereas the trifocal IOLs produced better near vision. Higher frequency of dysphotopsia\nwas seen with the trifocal IOLs....
Background: To compare refractive outcomes after cataract surgery between patients with closed-angle and openangle\nglaucoma and evaluate the influence of preoperative factors on refractive outcomes in patients with glaucoma.\nMethods: Patients diagnosed with glaucoma and who underwent uncomplicated cataract surgery were enrolled in\nthis retrospective observational study. We collected data including age, history of prior laser peripheral iridotomy and\ntrabeculectomy, type of glaucoma, manifest refraction, intraocular pressure, axial length, and various anterior segment\nparameters using anterior-segment optical coherence tomography. Factors associated with unsatisfactory refractive\noutcome at postoperative 6 month were evaluated.\nResults: A total of 143 eyes (143 subjects) were included. Of these, 49 and 94 had closed-angle and open-angle\nglaucoma, respectively. At postoperative-6 month evaluation, the mean absolute error (MAE) predicted by the SRK-II\nand SRK-T formulae was 0.67 �± 0.61 and 0.81 �± 0.66 diopters (D), respectively. The overall predictability of achieving\nwithin �± 1.0 D of target was 76.92 % and 72.73 %, respectively. At a cutoff value of 1.0 D for MAE, there was no\nstatistical significant difference in refractive outcome between the closed-angle and open-angle glaucoma groups.\nLogistic regression modeling showed that large lens vault (LV) was a significant predictor of unsatisfactory refractive\noutcome after cataract surgery in patients with glaucoma.\nConclusions: When considering cataract surgery in patients with glaucoma, surgeons should recognize that the\nrefractive outcomes may be unsatisfactory in eyes with large LV....
Background: Evidences have identified the correlation of 8-oxoguanine DNA glycosylase-1 (OGG1) and ephreceptor\ntyrosine kinase-type A2 (EPHA2) polymorphisms in age-related cataract (ARC) risk. However, the results\nwere not consistent. The objective of this study was to examine the role of these two gene polymorphisms in ARC\nsusceptibility.\nMethods: Eligible caseââ?¬â??control studies published between January 2000 and 2015 were searched and retrieved in\nthe electronic databases. The odds ratio with 95 % confidence interval (CI) was employed to calculate the strength\nof the relationship.\nResults: We totally screened out six articles, including 5971 cataract patients and 4189 matched controls. Three\nvariants were contained (OGG1 rs1052133; EPHA2 rs7543472 and rs11260867). For OGG1 rs1052133, we detected a\nsignificant correlation between OGG1 polymorphism and ARC risk under the heterogenous model (CG vs. CC:\nOR = 1.34, 95 % CI = 1.06ââ?¬â??1.70, P = 0.01) and dominant model (GG+CG vs. CC: OR = 1.45, 95 % CI = 1.16ââ?¬â??1.81, P = 0.\n001), especially in patients with cortical cataract of subgroup analysis by phenotypes (P < 0.05). For EPHA2\nrs7543472 and rs11260867, we did not find a positive association between these two mutations and ARC\nsusceptibility in total cases. Subgroup analysis by phenotypes of cataract showed that only in cortical cataract,\ngenotypes of rs7543472 under the allele model, homogenous model and recessive model; genotypes of\nrs11260867 under the heterogenous model and dominant model were associated with ARC risk.\nConclusions: OGG1 rs1052133 (CG and CG+GG genotypes) might be risk factor for ARC, particularly in cortical\ncataract risk. EPHA2 rs7543472 (T allele and TT genotype) and rs11260867 (CG and GG+CG genotypes) might be\nassociated with cortical cataract....
Purpose.The aim of this meta-analysis was to clarify the association between the plasma endothelin-1 level and the risks of normal\ntension glaucoma (NTG) and primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG). Methods. Relevant publications were collected from three\ndatabases including PubMed, EMBASE, and theWeb of Science through December 31, 2015. In this study, the terms ââ?¬Å?(endothelin\nOR ET) AND glaucomaââ?¬Â were searched. Review Manager 5.2 was used to process the data. Results. Seven studies (212 cases, 164\ncontrols) were included for the NTG analysis. The mean plasma endothelin-1 level in the NTG subjects was 0.60 pg/mL (...
Background: To present a coincidence of macular telangiectasia type 2 and solitary retinal astrocytic hamartoma in\none patient.\nCase presentation: A 50-year-old woman was examined in the Department of Ophthalmology of University\nhospital Kralovske Vinohrady for complaints of metamorphopsia in her left eye. Her uncorrected visual acuity\n(VA) was 4/4 on Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study charts (ETDRS), on the retina of her left eye\nwhite, prominent, partially calcified tumour 1 disc diameter in diameter, 1,5 disc diameter from the foveola\nwas detected on the retina. In the macular region of both eyes, parafoveal greying with crystalline deposits\nand changes in retinal vasculature were visible. We performed following examinations: fluorescein angiography (FA),\nB-scan ultrasound, spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) including photo documentation.\nFA showed partial hyperfluorescence of mulberry-like surface of the tumour typical for retinal astrocytic\nhamartoma. Parafoveally in both eyes, leakage from parafoveal telangiectasia was apparent. SD-OCT showed\ncystoid space in the macular region of both eyes as well as changes in inner and outer photoreceptor\nsegment junction in left eye. SD-OCT of the tumour showed proliferation in retinal nerve fibre layer with\nnormal structure of underlying retinal layers and choroid. Ultrasound examination of the tumour detected\nsolid, highly echogenic prominent tumour with high reflectivity and acoustic shadow.\nConclusion: A coincidence of two relatively rare clinical units, macular telangiectasia type 2 and solitary\nastrocytic hamartoma was detected as a unique and rare observation....
Background: To evaluate the short-term reproducibility of diurnal intraocular pressure (IOP) and ocular perfusion\npressure (OPP) measurements in normal volunteers, untreated normal-tension glaucoma (NTG) and primary open-angle\nglaucoma (POAG) patients.\nMethods: Fifty-four healthy volunteers (control group), 67 NTG patients and 54 POAG patients were recruited. The IOPs\nof both eyes were measured with a Goldmann applanation tonometer at 3-h intervals over 2 consecutive days. Blood\npressure (BP) measurements were collected at the same times. The mean IOP/OPP, peak IOP/OPP, trough IOP/OPP and\nIOP/OPP fluctuations on each day were also calculated. The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to\nevaluate the reproducibilities.\nResults: In the control group, the ICCs of mean IOP, peak IOP, trough IOP and IOP fluctuation were 0.921, 0.889, 0.888,\nand 0.661, respectively, and the ICCs of the mean OPP, peak OPP, trough OPP and OPP fluctuations were 0.962, 0.918,\n0.953, and 0.680, respectively. In the NTG group, the ICCs of the mean IOP, peak IOP, trough IOP and IOP fluctuation\nwere 0.862, 0.741, 0.798, and 0.290, respectively, and the ICCs of the mean OPP, peak OPP, trough OPP and OPP\nfluctuations were 0.947, 0.828, 0.927, and âË?â??0.008, respectively. In the POAG group, the ICCs of the mean IOP, peak IOP,\ntrough IOP and IOP fluctuation were 0.857, 0.666, 0.808, and 0.546, respectively, and the ICCs of the mean OPP, peak\nOPP, trough OPP and OPP fluctuation were 0.934, 0.842, 0.910, and 0.093, respectively.\nConclusion: The IOP measurements within a single day were not highly reproducible in the short-term. The normal\nvolunteers exhibited better IOP and OPP reproducibilities than the glaucoma patients. The IOP and OPP fluctuations\ncould not be accurately evaluated based on the IOP or OPP measurements within a single day.\nAbbreviations: AGIS, Advanced glaucoma intervention study; BP, Blood pressure; CCT, Central corneal thickness;\nCLS, Contact lens sensor; DBP, Diastolic blood pressure; GAT, Goldmann applanation tonometer; HR, Heart rate;\nICCs, Intraclass correlation coefficients; IOP, Intraocular pressure; MD, Mean deviation; NTG, Normal-tension glaucoma;\nOHT, Ocular hypertension; OPP, Ocular perfusion pressure; POAG, Primary open-angle glaucoma; SBP, Systolic blood\npressure; TSNIT, Temporal, superior, nasal, inferior, and temporal; VF, Visual field...
Background: In randomized, controlled trials of open-angle glaucoma (OAG) or ocular hypertension (OHT),\nbimatoprost 0.01 % improved tolerability while retaining the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy of\nbimatoprost 0.03 %. Given geographic/racial differences in glaucoma presentation, the APPEAL study assessed the\noccurrence and severity of hyperemia produced by bimatoprost 0.01 %, and its efficacy, in the Taiwanese clinical\nsetting.\nMethods: In this multicenter, open-label, observational study, treatment-na�¯ve and previously treated patients with\nOHT or OAG received once-daily bimatoprost 0.01 % for 12 weeks. Hyperemia (primary endpoint) was graded at\nbaseline, week 6, and week 12 using a photonumeric scale (0, +0.5, +1, +2, +3), grouped (â�¤ +1, none to mild; â�¥ +2,\nmoderate to severe), and reported as unchanged from baseline, improved, or worsened. IOP assessments followed\nthe same schedule. Supplemental efficacy analyses were conducted based on previous therapies.\nResults: The intent-to-treat population (N = 312) included treatment-na�¯ve (13.5 %) and previously treated (86.5 %)\npatients; mean age was 53.3 years. At baseline, 46.3 % of previously treated patients were receiving prostaglandin\nanalog (PGA) monotherapy. At week 12, 91.2 %, 5.9 %, and 2.9 % of treatment-na�¯ve patients exhibited unchanged,\nworsened, and improved hyperemia from baseline, respectively; 77.9 %, 12.9 %, and 9.2 % of previously treated\npatients showed no change, worsening, and improvement, respectively. There were no statistically significant shifts\nin hyperemia severity in either group, or in subgroups based on previous use of any PGA, any non-PGA, latanoprost, or\ntravoprost monotherapies. In treatment-na�¯ve patients, mean IOP reduction from baseline (18.0 �± 3.8 mm Hg) was 3.6\nmm Hg at week 12 (P < 0.0001); 83.3 % had baseline IOP â�¤ 21 mm Hg. In previously treated patients, mean additional\nIOP reduction from baseline (17.8 �± 3.9 mm Hg) was 2.6 mm Hg (P < 0.0001); similar results were observed in patient\nsubgroups based on previous therapies. Conclusions: In the Taiwanese clinical setting, bimatoprost 0.01 % provided significant IOP lowering in treatment-na�¯ve\npatients (regardless of baseline IOP) and previously treated patients (even those with relatively low IOP on other\ntherapies), while causing no significant changes in hyperemia from baseline....
Loading....