Comparison of the Neodymium-doped Yttrium Aluminum Garnet Capsulotomy Rate with Viscoimplantation and the Hydroimplantation Intraocular Lens Technique

PURPOSE: To investigate the rate of neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG) laser capsulotomy in the hydroimplantation intraocular lens (IOL) technique. METHODS: This retrospective study was comprised of 6,192 eyes in 3,790 patients who underwent surgery from January 2013 to September 2017 and then were followed up for at least 1 year. The eyes of these patients were divided into two groups: either viscoimplantation or hydroimplantation. The follow-up examinations were carried out on the 1st day, 4th day, 1st month, and 3 months to 1 year postoperatively. The Nd:YAG capsulotomy rates were evaluated by the different IOL implantation techniques and IOL materials. RESULTS: The mean follow-up duration of the patients was in the viscoimplantation group 14.85 ± 2.43 and 15.05 ± 1.93 months in the hydroimplantation group. The Nd:YAG capsulotomy rate was significantly lower in the hydroimplantation group compared with the viscoimplantation group for the entire hydrophilic IOL model (p < 0.001). In addition, the Nd:YAG rate was lower in the hydroimplantation group that used a hydrophilic IOL than it was in the viscoimplantation group, which used a hydrophobic IOL. CONCLUSIONS: The hydroimplantation technique reduced the Nd:YAG capsulotomy rate.

Corneal and conjunctival sensitivity in rosacea patients

Purpose: To assess corneal and conjunctival sensitivity in rosacea patients

Methods: A total of 55 patients with rosacea and 37 control subjects participated in the study. Corneal and conjunctival sensitivity was determined by Cochet-Bonnet esthesiometer. Subjective symptoms of ocular dryness were evaluated using Ocular Surface Disease Index [OSDI]. Schirmer's I test [ST], tear breakup time [tBUT] and ocular surface staining with fluorescein were carried out to measure objective signs

Results: The mean corneal and conjunctival sensitivity did not differ significantly between rosacea patients and controls [all p > 0.05]. Schirmer's I test and tBUT were significantly reduced [p = 0.004 for OD and p < 0.001 for OS] and grade of ocular surface staining was significantly high [p = 0.018 for OD and p = 0.038 for OS] in rosacea patients. Corneal and conjunctival sensitivity did not show significant correlation with ST, tBUT, ocular surface staining [Oxford Schema], duration of rosacea and OSDI score

Conclusions: Corneal and conjunctival sensitivity did not change significantly in rosacea

Retinal nerve fiber layer thickness in patients with essential tremor

Objective: To investigate the retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness in essential tremor (ET). Methods: Twenty-seven eyes of 27 patients with essential tremor were included in this study. Twentyseven eyes of 27 healthy volunteers served as controls. All eyes were examined with spectral domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) (Retinascan Advanced RS-3000; NIDEK, Gamagori, Japan) using image filling software program (NAVIS-EX, NIDEK, Tokyo, Japan). Results: No statistically significant difference was detected between ET patients and control group for overall (RNFL) and foveal retinal thickness parameters. [RNFL thickness (Average thickness p=0.86, superior average p=0.22, inferior average p=0.24, nasal average p=0.06, temporal average p=0.88), foveal retinal thickness p=0.63] There was no relationship between OCT parameters and age, gender and duration of ET (all p>0.05). Conclusion: We did not find altered RNFL and foveal thickness values in patients with ET compared to controls. Retinal thickness changes do not seem to be a potentially useful biomarker in ET patients.

Retinal nerve fiber layer thickness in patients with essential tremor

Objective: To investigate the retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness in essential tremor (ET). Methods: Twenty-seven eyes of 27 patients with essential tremor were included in this study. Twentyseven eyes of 27 healthy volunteers served as controls. All eyes were examined with spectral domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) (Retinascan Advanced RS-3000; NIDEK, Gamagori, Japan) using image filling software program (NAVIS-EX, NIDEK, Tokyo, Japan). Results: No statistically significant difference was detected between ET patients and control group for overall (RNFL) and foveal retinal thickness parameters. [RNFL thickness (Average thickness p=0.86, superior average p=0.22, inferior average p=0.24, nasal average p=0.06, temporal average p=0.88), foveal retinal thickness p=0.63] There was no relationship between OCT parameters and age, gender and duration of ET (all p>0.05). Conclusion: We did not find altered RNFL and foveal thickness values in patients with ET compared to controls. Retinal thickness changes do not seem to be a potentially useful biomarker in ET patients.

Anesthetic effectiveness of topical levobupivacaine 0.75% versus topical proparacaine 0.5% for intravitreal injections

Today no method of topical anesthesia for intravitreal injection administration has been proven to make the patient comfortable yet. We compared the efficacy of topical levobupivacaine 0.75% and proparacaine 0.5% in patients undergoing intravitreal injections. A prospective, randomized study comparing two agents for topical anesthesia in intravitreal injections. Ninety-six consecutive patients were enrolled into two groups to receive either topical levobupivacaine 0.75% [n=48] or proparacaine 0.5% [n=48]. Patients were asked to score their pain using a visual analog scale [VAS] immediately following the injection. The average of these scores was used as the primary outcome. The surgeon performing the procedure scored his perception of the patients' pain using the Wong-Baker FACES scale. Mean VAS pain scores for two groups were found to be 44.77 +/- 16.42 and 34.18 +/- 14.83, respectively. Mean VAS pain score in the proparacaine group was significantly lower than that in the levobupivacaine group [P= 0.003]. Mean Wong-Baker FACES scores for the two groups were 1.08 +/- 0.49 and 1.10 +/- 0.30, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between levobupivacaine and proparacaine groups [P=0.824]. Topical proparacaine 0.5% was more effective in preventing pain during intravitreal injections.