Changes in refractive status of amblyopic patients with partially refractive esotropia.

PURPOSE: To investigate the changes in refractive status of amblyopic patients with partially refractive esotropia (PAET). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Amblyopic patients with PAET were enrolled. Non-amblyopic patients with full refractive accommodative esotropia (RAET) were included in the study as a control group. Preoperative and postoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), spherical equivalent (SE), astigmatism, stereoacuity, and deviations at near and distance were evaluated and statistically compared within the study group. Mean BCVA, SE, astigmatism were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The patient and the control groups were composed of 58 eyes of 29 patients per group. There were statistically significant differences between pre- and postoperative mean astigmatism and SE between the patient and control groups. The mean astigmatism was higher in amblyopic eyes when compared with the eyes in the control group (P:0.009). During the follow-up period, changes in SE and astigmatism were not different between groups. CONCLUSION: The mean SE and astigmatism were changed in both amblyopic patients with PAET and non-amblyopic patients with RAET during the follow-up period. This suggested that neither amblyopia nor strabismus surgery has an effect on refractive status in patients with PAET.

Is topical corticosteroid necessary in traumatic hyphema?

PURPOSE: To compare the outcomes in the management of traumatic hyphema treated with topical corticosteroid plus supportive therapy versus only supportive therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, 206 patients were divided into two groups; group I, 98 eyes were treated with topical corticosteroid 12 × 1 and supportive therapy including bed rest, keeping the head elevated (45 degrees), and hydration. In group II, 108 eyes were treated with only supportive therapy. Hyphema size, initial and final visual acuities and intraocular pressure, time to hyphema clearance, and incidence of rebleeding were evaluated. RESULTS: The time needed for hyphema resorption in the two groups were 60.25 ± 33.9 and 62.3 ± 28.9 hours respectively (P=0.62). There was no significant difference in rebleeding rate between the topical corticosteroid group (4.01%) and non-steroid group (6.48%) (P=0.67). The initial and final visual acuities were similar in the two groups (P=0.86). In Groups I and II, the average intraocular pressures were 19.7 ± 8.01 and 14.2 ± 10.2 mmHg respectively. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P=0.04). CONCLUSION: Patients who were treated with topical corticosteroids were no less likely to experience a rebleed or a poor visual outcome than those treated with supportive therapy alone. Supportive therapy alone may be convenient and cost-effective management strategy in uncomplicated traumatic hyphema.