Cataract extraction without prophylactic treatment in patients with severe factor XI deficiency.

PURPOSE: To assess the risks of intraoperative and postoperative bleeding associated with cataract extraction without prophylactic treatment in patients with severe factor XI (FXI) deficiency. DESIGN: Prospective interventional case series. SETTING: Single institute. STUDY POPULATION: Consecutive unrelated patients with severe FXI deficiency who underwent cataract extraction under topical anesthesia, with a clear corneal incision, phacoemulsification, and implantation of a foldable posterior chamber intraocular lens (PCIOL) were enrolled. Patients with associated intraocular conditions that could complicate the surgery were excluded. INTERVENTION: Cataract extraction without prophylactic treatment for the FXI deficiency. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Assessment of intraoperative and postoperative ocular bleeding and other related complications. RESULTS: Seven patients ranging in age from 61 to 95 years (median, 79) underwent phacoemulsification and PCIOL implantation in 11 eyes. Five patients (71%) were homozygotes for type II mutation of the FXI gene (activity level of <1 U/dl), 1 patient was a homozygote for type III mutation (activity level of 11 U/dl), and 1 patient was a compound heterozygote for types II and III (activity level of 3 U/dl). Three of the patients (43%), all type II homozygotes, also had an inhibitor antibody to FXI. All 7 patients were followed for at least 1 week after the operation. The surgery was uneventful in all eyes, and neither major nor minor bleeding events were observed in any of the operated eyes during surgery and follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Cataract extraction by phacoemulsification in uncomplicated eyes can be performed safely without prophylactic treatment in patients with severe FXI deficiency with or without inhibitor antibodies against FXI.

Alcohol- vs hypertonic saline-assisted laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the predictability and safety of hypertonic saline (5% sodium chloride) [correction]-assisted laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (HS-LASEK) vs 20% alcohol-assisted LASEK (A-LASEK). SETTING: American Laser Medical Center, Rishon Le-Zion, Israel. METHODS: Fifty-two consecutive eyes (26 patients) were randomized to HS-LASEK (30 eyes) and A-LASEK (22 eyes) groups. The patients' eyes were examined, refracted, and photographed at 1 day, 5 days, 2 weeks, and 1 month postoperatively by a masked physician. Corneal topography and confocal examination were performed before and 1 month after surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The predictability, accuracy, and visual recovery of HS-LASEK vs A-LASEK in the first postoperative month. RESULTS: The accuracy of HS-LASEK was similar and sometimes better than A-LASEK. Two weeks after surgery, 17 eyes (57%) in the HS-LASEK group and 10 eyes (46%) in the A-LASEK group were within +/- 0.5 diopter of the intended refractive correction (P<.05). At all time points eyes in the HS-LASEK group had better best-corrected visual acuity than eyes in the A-LASEK group, although the uncorrected visual acuity was similar. Eighteen (61%) of the HS-LASEK-treated eyes and 12 (55%) of the A-LASEK-treated eyes had an epithelial defect after surgery. The HS-LASEK-treated eyes had significantly larger epithelial defects. The resolution of the defects was faster in the HS-LASEK-treated eyes (mean +/- SD, 4.5 +/- 0.4 days vs 5.8 +/- 0.2 days, P = .002). The subepithelial scar was thicker in A-LASEK-treated eyes. CONCLUSIONS: Hypertonic saline-assisted LASEK provides good postoperative accuracy, safety, and a similar rate of complications. In view of recent evidence regarding the epithelial toxic effects of alcohol, HS-LASEK might be a better treatment alternative.

Contrast sensitivity after wave front-guided LASIK.

PURPOSE: To compare the effects on contrast sensitivity of wave front-guided (WFG) versus standard LASIK. DESIGN: Prospective, nonrandomized, comparative clinical study. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-four eyes of 13 consecutive patients (mean age, 25.2+/-8.4 years; spherical equivalent, -0.5 to -4.25 diopters [D]) treated with WFG LASIK (WaveLight-Allegretto scanning-spot laser and wave front analyzer) and 22 eyes of 12 consecutive patients (mean age, 28.4+/-9.1 years; spherical equivalent, -0.75 to -4.5 D) treated with standard LASIK (WaveLight-Allegretto scanning-spot laser). METHODS: Best-corrected contrast sensitivity was measured before and 1 month after surgery in both the WFG LASIK group and the standard LASIK group. A sine-wave contrast sensitivity test (functional acuity contrast test) was used to measure contrast sensitivity at 5 spatial frequencies (1.5, 3, 6, 12, and 18 cycles/degree). We compared the LASIK-induced changes in contrast sensitivity in each groups at each spatial frequency. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The effect on contrast sensitivity of WFG LASIK versus standard LASIK. RESULTS: Uncorrected visual acuity of 20/20 or better was achieved by 72% of eyes treated with WFG LASIK and by 70% of the eyes treated with standard LASIK. One month after LASIK, 88% of the contrast sensitivity measurements improved in the WFG LASIK group, whereas in the standard LASIK group, only 40% of the contrast sensitivity measurements improved. The contrast sensitivity improvement was significantly larger in the WFG LASIK group at all spatial frequencies (P<0.05). The WFG LASIK patients had a negative correlation between the changes in contrast sensitivity and the preoperative refractive error. CONCLUSIONS: The ability of WFG LASIK to correct optical aberrations results in significantly improved contrast sensitivity compared with standard LASIK 1 month after surgery.

Comparison of intraocular pressure profiles during cataract surgery by phacoemulsification and extracapsular cataract extraction.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In view of reports of fluctuations in intraocular pressure (IOP) during phacoemulsification, real-time IOP during small-incision, manual extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) and phacoemulsification was measured to determine the effect of anterior chamber maintainer infusion on intraoperative IOP dynamics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A comparative study of IOP during cataract surgery was conducted by these two methods in 29 patients. An anterior chamber maintainer infused balanced salt solution continuously into the eye throughout ECCE. The anterior chamber maintainer was open in 7 cases throughout phacoemulsification and switched off during phacoemulsification in 7 cases. RESULTS: IOP measurements during small-incision ECCE were physiologic (range, 5 to 20 mm Hg) during most of the operation and coincided with the value of hydrostatic pressure established by the height of the anterior chamber maintainer infusion bottle. During phacoemulsification without concomitant anterior chamber maintainer, IOP was positive (> 2 to 3 mm Hg) as long as the phacoemulsification infusion line was activated (position 1). Moving to position 0 caused hypotony. Occlusion breaks occasionally caused wide fluctuations in IOP. Concomitant anterior chamber maintainer and phacoemulsification infusion did not prevent surges, but may account for the lower range of fluctuation. The anterior chamber maintainer also maintained a positive IOP at position 0 during phacoemulsification. CONCLUSIONS: An anterior chamber maintainer in conjunction with a self-sealing incision can maintain stable physiologic IOP during small-incision ECCE. The IOP fluctuations during phacoemulsification, especially during occlusion breaks, can be attenuated by an anterior chamber maintainer.