A variation of foveal morphology in a group of children with hypermetropia.

PURPOSE: During routine eye examinations, we noticed widened and flattened foveal pits with loss of normal V-shaped foveal profile and a pseudohole-like appearance in some otherwise healthy hypermetropic children. Our purpose was to describe clinical significance and multimodal imaging features of this incidental finding. METHODS: Prospectively, 25 eyes of 13 hypermetropic children with these foveal changes and 36 eyes of 19 hypermetropic children with normal foveal appearance were enrolled. The macular thickness measurements and foveal parameters including pit diameter, depth, base, and area obtained by optical coherence tomography (OCT) (Heidelberg Spectralis, Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany), macular superficial and deep vessel density (VD) and foveal avascular zone values obtained by optical coherence tomography angiography (Avanti RTVue­XR; Optovue, Fremont, CA, USA) were noted. The correlations of these parameters with visual function were evaluated. RESULTS: In the study group, significantly widened and flattened pit contours with decreased central foveal thickness (p = 0.01), and increased distance between foveal edges (p < 0.001) were observed. While the whole image superficial macular VD was similar between the groups (p = 0.74), a significant decrease in deep macular VD was observed in the study group (p = 0.01). None of these changes were correlated with visual acuity. CONCLUSION: Wider and flattened foveal pits described here represent a newly defined variation in healthy hypermetropic children. Although a correlation with visual acuity was not evident, these changes in foveal profile are shown to be related with macular microvascular changes in deep capillary plexus. Awareness of these morphologic changes will help clinicians in the differential diagnosis of macular pseudohole.

Cross-sectional analysis of tobacco addiction in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has become an important health issue with consequences for special populations since 2019. Tobacco use is an important public health issue and tobacco users are a risk group for lung infections. Materials and Methods: The aim of this study is to obtain information about disease prevalence and severity, laboratory parameters, and changes in radiological findings between smokers and non-smokers who were hospitalized, followed up, and treated for COVID-19, and to find answers to critical questions regarding the response to antiviral and supportive therapy. Two hundred eighty-six patients who were hospitalized and treated between March 2020-February 2021 in the COVID-19 Isolation Ward of Baskent University Hospital were included in the study. The patients were grouped as current smokers, non-smokers, and ex-smokers. The groups were compared in terms of symptoms, laboratory findings, radiological findings, and treatment response. Result: The median age of the patients included in the study was 59 (IQR= 32). Of the patients, 40.6% were female and 59.4% were male. In our study, we discovered that there were fewer female smokers (p<0.001). When the current smokers (n= 56), non-smokers (n= 159), and ex-smokers (n= 71) were compared based on their findings, it was found that dyspnea was more common in current smokers (p= 0.009). Lung involvement was found to be more common (p= 0.002) and multifocal in the current smokers group (p= 0.038). The levels of oxygen saturation at the times of admission and discharge were lower in current smokers (p= 0.002 and p= 0.038). The need for nasal oxygen and noninvasive mechanical ventilation was also found to be higher in current smokers (p= 0.008 and p= 0.039). Systemic steroid requirement was higher in current smokers (p= 0.013). There was no statistically significant difference in terms of mortality between current smokers, ex-smokers, and non-smokers (p= 0.662). Conclusions: The analysis of the findings of the patients hospitalized in the COVID-19 isolation ward indicated that COVID-19 leads to a more serious course in patients with a history of smoking.

Differences in Antibody Responses Between an Inactivated SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine and the BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccine in Solid-Organ Transplant Recipients.

OBJECTIVES: Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 may reduce COVID-19 mortality and complications in solidorgan transplant recipients, and we evaluated the associated antibody responses and adverse effects in this high-risk population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective observational study (April-June 2021) included 10 liver and 38 kidney transplant recipients who received 2 vaccine doses (Sinovac, n = 31; or BioNTech, n = 17) and 56 healthy adults (Sinovac), all of whom provided 3 blood samples (prevaccination, 4 weeks after first dose, and 4-6 weeks after second dose) for quantitative tests (Abbott Quant assay forimmunoglobulin G antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein). Type I error was α = .05 in all statistical analyses (SPSS, version 25). RESULTS: We analyzed demographic data, antibody responses, and adverse events after 2 doses of SARSCoV-2 vaccine, comparedimmune responses from solidorgan transplant recipients (median age, 36.5 years) versus healthy patients (median age, 37.5 years), and observed significantly higher seropositivity in healthy versus transplant patients after Sinovac vaccination (100% vs 67.5%; P = .001). However, we observed no significant seropositive differences for Sinovac versus BioNTech second doses in transplantrecipients. Median SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G level after second dose was significantly higher in BioNTech (1388.6 AU/mL) versus Sinovac patients (136.6 AU/mL) (P = .012). The seropositivity difference between the 2 vaccines was significant in participants 24 to 44 years old (P = .040). The rate of at least 1 side effect was 82.4% (n = 14) for BioNTech vaccine and 32.3% (n = 10) for Sinovac vaccine, and the difference was statistically significant.The most common side effect was arm pain (significantly higher in BioNTech group). CONCLUSIONS: Solid-organ transplant recipients demonstrated inadequate vaccine responses (higher risk of complications and mortality) versus healthy patients. Furthermore, immune responses may differ between vaccines. Therefore, additional vaccine doses and strict control measures remain crucial.

Comparison of ocular discomfort after three different epithelial debridement techniques for corneal collagen cross-linking in keratoconus treatment.

PURPOSE: To compare the severity and duration of ocular discomfort after three different epithelial debridement techniques for corneal collagen cross-linking in the treatment of keratoconus. METHODS: Fifty-five patients (65 eyes) known to have keratoconus were enrolled in this retrospective study. The eyes were divided into three groups based on the technique used for epithelial debridement for corneal collagen cross-linking procedure; excimer laser transepithelial phototherapeutic keratectomy was used in group 1 (18 eyes), alcohol-assisted epithelial removal was used in group 2 (27 eyes), and mechanical epithelial debridement was used in group 3 (20 eyes). Preoperative and postoperative (third month) best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) using Snellen chart, objective refraction, and keratometry results were recorded. The results of the questionnaire obtained from the patient's medical records were reviewed regarding their subjective evaluation of postoperative symptoms including foreign body sensation, tearing, photophobia, and burning at the end of the first postoperative week. Paired-samples t test was used to compare preoperative and postoperative clinical findings. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to analyze the differences between three independent groups. RESULTS: BCVA improved from 0.51 ± 0.27 to 0.58 ± 0.21 (p = 0.05). Objective mean spherical and cylindrical refraction decreased from -5.08 ± 2.78D to -4.46 ± 2.91D (p = 0.22) and from -3.45 ± 2.73D to -3.03 ± 1.97D (p = 0.25). Mean maximum keratometry reading (K max) decreased from 57.63 ± 4.73D to 56.13 ± 4.47D (p = 0.001). The mean score for foreign body sensation was the highest in group 3 (4.50 ± 0.53) and the lowest in group 1 (2.10 ± 1.85) (p = 0.01). The mean scores for tearing, photophobia, and burning sensation were comparable in three groups (p = 0.84, p = 0.13, and p = 0.61, respectively). The duration of photophobia was the shortest in group 1 (1.50 ± 2.37 days), followed by group 3 (2.00 ± 1.31 days) and group 2 (4.00 ± 1.83 days) (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The severity and duration of adverse subjective symptoms during the first postoperative week after corneal collagen cross-linking appear to be milder with epithelial debridement using excimer laser transepithelial technique compared with -assisted debridement and mechanical debridement.

Interobserver and intermethod variability in data interpretation of breast strain elastography in suspicious breast lesions

Background/aim: Strain elastography has the disadvantage of being operator-dependent. Interobserver variability is observed during image acquisition and interpretation. This study aimed to analyze the interobserver and intermethod variability of strain elastography in image interpretation and evaluate the diagnostic performance combining elasticity score and strain ratio with ultrasonography. Materials and methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 70 breast lesions evaluated with B-mode ultrasonography and strain elastography. B-mode ultrasonography findings, elasticity scores, and strain ratio values were evaluated using static images by two radiologists. BI-RADS assessment of the lesions and the decision of both observers as to whether the biopsy was required using B-mode ultrasonography, and the combined ultrasonography+elasticity score, and the combined ultrasonography+elasticity score+strain ratio were compared with the histopathological results. Also, the interobserver agreement was analyzed for all the combinations. Results: There was very good agreement (weighted κ = 0.865) between the observers for the elasticity scores. Very good agreement was observed between the observers for BI-RADS assessments using the combined ultrasonography+elasticity score and the combined ultrasonography+elasticity score+strain ratio (weighted κ = 0.848, and 0.902, respectively). Area under the curve of B-mode ultrasonography, the combined B-mode ultrasonography+elasticity score, and the combined B-mode ultrasonography+elasticity score+strain ratio, were calculated as 0.859, 0.866, and 0.916 for observer 1, and 0.851, 0.829, and 0.916 for observer 2, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between the observers' diagnostic performances in any of the combinations (P = 0.703, 0.067, and 0.972, respectively). Conclusion: In the evaluation and further assessment of breast lesions, semiquantitative strain ratio calculation may help improve diagnostic accuracy by reducing interpretational variety, when used together with B-mode ultrasonography and elasticity scoring, especially for inexperienced individuals.