Effective pupil dilatation with a mixture of 0.75% tropicamide and 2.5% phenylephrine: A randomized controlled trial.

Purpose: To compare the efficacy in pupil dilatation between a mixture containing 0.75% tropicamide and 2.5% phenylephrine and the alternate application of 1% tropicamide and 10% phenylephrine eye drops. Material and Methods: Patients requiring pupil dilatation were randomized to receive one drop of the mixture every 10 min for four times or our standard application of one drop of 1% tropicamide alternating with one drop of 10% phenylephrine every 10 min for two cycles. Pupil size was measured under bright light with the pupil gauge before, and every 5 min after initial application for 40 min. Application of the drops was discontinued once the pupil diameter reached 7 mm. Blood pressure and pulse rate were monitored every 15 min. Results: Of 40 patients (age 57.3±10.9 years, range 35-70 years), 22 were randomized into the mixture group and 18 into the alternate drug group. Baseline pupil sizes were 1.7±0.5 mm in the mixture group and 1.8±0.4 mm in the alternate drug group. The pupils were successfully dilated to 7 mm within 40 min in 17 patients of the mixture group compared to seven patients in the alternate drug group (P=0.004, Log Rank test). The mean pupil sizes at 40 min were 6.6±0.8 and 6.0±0.9 mm in the mixture and alternate drug groups respectively (P=0.050, t-test). Blood pressure and pulse rate were stable and similar in both groups. Conclusions: The mixture of 0.75% tropicamide and 2.5% phenylephrine is superior to our standard application of 1% tropicamide alternating with 10% phenylephrine. It provides faster and more successful pupil dilatation within 40 min.

Nonmydriatic digital retinal images for determining diabetic retinopathy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of nonmydriatic digital retinal images for determining diabetic retinopathy. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Single field 45-degree digital retinal images of 225 eyes from 142 diabetic patients were obtained with a nonmydriatic camera. The images were diagnosed and graded by a general ophthalmologist. These results were compared with clinical diagnosis obtained by retinal specialists, after examination by using biomicroscope with plus lens and indirect ophthalmoscope of the patients. International clinical diabetic retinopathy disease severity scale was used for grading diabetic retinopathy in all cases. RESULTS: Presence of diabetic retinopathy was detected in 70 eyes (31.1%). The sensitivity and specificity for determining diabetic retinopathy was 68.57% (95%CI 57.00-78.20) and 92.25% (95%CI 87.00-95.50), respectively. The positive predictive value and negative predictive value was 80.00% (95%CI 68.20-88.20) and 86.67% (95%CI 80.60-91.00). Overall accuracy was 84.89%. CONCLUSION: Single field 45-degree nonmydriatic digital retinal images were limited by fair sensitivity for determining diabetic retinopathy although overall accuracy from the present study was relatively high. Upcountry, this tool might facilitate increased access of diabetic patients for eye evaluation but cannot replace standard eye examination.

Surgical techniques of cataract surgery and subsequent postoperative endophthalmitis.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the incidence and characteristics of patients with endophthalmitis after extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) to those after phacoemulsification MATERIAL AND METHOD: Records of patients receiving intravitreal antibiotic injection to treat endophthalmitis after cataract surgery between Jan 2001 and Dec 2004 were reviewed. Demographic data and other characteristics including associated diseases, details of cataract surgical procedure and intraoperative complication, onset of endophthalmitis after cataract surgery, presenting symptoms and signs of endophthalmitis, how endophthalmitis was managed, causative organisms, duration of hospitalization and results of treatment were collected. This information was compared between those of endophthalmitis patients after ECCE and those after phacoemulsification. RESULTS: There were 5 cases who developed endophthalmitis after ECCE and 31 cases after phacoemulsification. The incidence was 0.365% after ECCE and 0.279% after phacoemulsification (p = 0.589). Visual acuity (VA) before cataract surgery in ECCE group was worse than the phacoemulsification group (median VA: counting fingers vs 6/36, p = 0.001). Median onset of endophthalmitis was 8 days after ECCE and 6 days after phacoemulsification. Presenting symptoms and signs were similar. Causative agents were identified in 4 (80%) and 14 (45%) cases in the ECCE and phacoemulsification groups respectively. Gram-positive bacteria were the major cause of infection in both groups. Endophthalmitis caused by citrobacter sp. in ECCE group and enterococcus or streptococcus sps. the phacoemulsification in the group ended up with enucleation or no light perception. CONCLUSION: The present study has not demonstrated an apparent difference between endophthalmitis after ECCE and those after phacoemulsification. Endophthalmitis after either procedure can be managed as the same condition.

Comparison of topical prednisolone acetate, ketorolac tromethamine and fluorometholone acetate in reducing inflammation after phacoemulsification.

AIMS: To compare the efficacy and ocular adverse effects of topical prednisolone acetate, ketorolac tromethamine, and fluorometholone acetate in reducing inflammation after phacoemulsification. METHOD: One hundred and twenty eyes were enrolled in a prospective, investigator-masked, randomized controlled trial. Each drug was prescribed 4 times a day for 28 days. The following data were recorded weekly: visual acuity, intraocular pressure, slit lamp biomicroscopy, grading of cells and flare in the anterior chamber, and ocular symptoms. RESULTS: The number of eyes with a minimal amount of cells in the anterior chamber in the ketorolac group was less than the prednisolone group on day 7 (11:20, p = 0.008) and day 14 (23:31, p = 0.015), and than fluorometholone group on day 7 (11:21, p = 0.011). Intraocular pressure in the prednisolone group was higher than the ketorolac group on day 21 (14.6:12.2 mmHg, p = 0.016). One eye in the prednisolone group had intraocular pressure of 32 mmHg. Burning sensation was reported frequently in the ketorolac group. CONCLUSION: All 3 drugs were effective in reducing post-operative inflammation. The efficacy of prednisolone acetate and fluorometholone acetate was comparable. Ketorolac tromethamine showed less efficacy than corticosteroids, however, it did not induce ocular hypertension.