ABSTRACT
Background: Intraocular pressure (IOP) peaks are key factors on the onset and progression of glaucoma. The water drinking test (WDT) detects IOP fluctuations and estimates the maximum IOP. Objective: To assess the IOP variations during the WDT in patients diagnosed or suspected of glaucoma treated at an ophthalmology clinic. Methods: This is an observational, descriptive, and retrospective study, using clinical records of patients whom underwent the WDT between January 2017 and August 2019. Results: The study included 300 eyes. The WDT was positive in 23.3% of the eyes. Basal IOP at 15, 30, and 45 min, as well as the maximum pressure, presented a similar mean, median, and mode, as well as a varying coefficient without much variability. The negative test group had a maximum IOP of 18.9 mmHg, compared with 20.3 mmHg in the positive test group. Conclusion: In a Colombian cohort of patients with diagnosed or suspected glaucoma whom underwent a WDT, 23.3% had positive result. 90% of the tests were positive at the 30-min interval. This test is a complementary tool in the follow-up of patients with glaucoma.
Introducción: Los picos de presión intraocular son factores importantes para la aparición y progresión del glaucoma. La prueba de sobrecarga hídrica permite detectar fluctuaciones de presión intraocular y estimar la presión máxima. Objetivo: Evaluar las variaciones en la presión intraocular durante la prueba de sobrecarga hídrica en pacientes de una clínica oftalmológica. Métodos: Estudio observacional, descriptivo, retrospectivo de revisión de historias clínicas de pacientes sometidos a la prueba de sobrecarga hídrica entre enero de 2017 y agosto de 2019. Resultados: Se incluyeron 300 ojos. La prueba de sobrecarga hídrica fue positiva en el 23,3% de los ojos. La presión intraocular basal, a los 15, 30 y 45 min, al igual que la presión máxima, tuvieron una media, mediana y moda similares, con un coeficiente de variación sin mucha variabilidad. El grupo con resultados negativos tuvo una presión intraocular máxima de 18,9 mmHg comparado con 20,3 mmHg del grupo con resultados positivos. Conclusión: En una cohorte colombiana de pacientes con diagnóstico o sospecha de glaucoma quienes se les realizó la prueba de sobrecarga hídrica, el 23,3% tuvo resultados positivos. El 90% de las pruebas fueron positivas en el intervalo de 30 min. Esta prueba es una herramienta complementaria en el seguimiento de pacientes con glaucoma.
Subject(s)
Humans , ColombiaABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Phakic Intraocular Lens (P-IOL) implantation is a safe, easy, predictable intervention designed to manage moderate to high refractive errors. Complications are relatively uncommon and include mainly cataract and intraocular pressure spikes. Toxic Anterior Segment Syndrome (TASS) is a rather unusual sterile anterior segment inflammation after uneventful intraocular surgery, extremely rarely reported after P-IOL implantation. Urrets-Zavalia Syndrome (UZS) is also very rarely described after P-IOL. To date, to the best of the authors' knowledge, no article has ever described the simultaneous occurrence of TASS and UZS in a patient after P-IOL implantation. OBJECTIVE: In this article, the authors present the case of a female patient with moderate myopic astigmatism, who underwent sequential P-IOL implantation at two different facilities. The postoperative course of the first eye was uneventful, but she developed complications associated to the intervention in the second eye. MATERIALS: The article describes the case of a young patient who underwent a sequential Phakic Intraocular Lens (P-IOL) implantation at two different institutions. The postoperative course of the first eye (left eye) was uneventful; however, the second eye (right eye) initially developed Toxic Anterior Segment Syndrome (TASS). Although timely and correct management was instituted, upon resolution of TASS, the patient developed Urrets-Zavalia Syndrome, anterior subcapsular cataract, and significant endothelial damage in the same eye. RESULTS: The patient was followed closely and managed accordingly; corneal edema and anterior segment inflammation of the right eye eventually resolved. Nevertheless, an anterior subcapsular cataract and a fixed dilated pupil remained; with normal intraocular pressure (IOP). Specular microscopy confirmed an endothelial cell loss in the TASS eye (right eye). Pupil size showed no reaction to repeated doses of Pilocarpine 2%. A month after surgery, refraction on her right eye was +0.25 + 0.75 × 93, which resulted in a 20/50 vision. CONCLUSIONS: TASS and UZS are both extremely rare complications after uneventful P-IOL implantation, with only a handful of cases having been reported of each of them. To date, this is the very first case where UZS ensued after and potentially as a consequence of TASS in a patient who had undergone P-IOL implantation. Although a direct causative element could not be pinpointed, the fact that the complication ensued after being operated in one surgical institution and not the other, could suggest some role of different sterilization and handling procedures, but no direct conclusion can be made on this case.
