Treatment of Severe Infectious Keratitis With Scleral Contact Lenses as a Reservoir of Moxifloxacin 0.5.

PURPOSE: To report the outcomes of using scleral contact lenses as antibiotic reservoirs as a therapeutic approach in a case series of severe infectious keratitis and to discuss the clinical potential. METHODS: This was a prospective consecutive case series study of 12 eyes treated for infectious keratitis at the "Conde de Valenciana" Institute of Ophthalmology. A scleral lens (SL) filled with 0.5% moxifloxacin was used as a reservoir and replaced every 24 hours until epithelization was complete or the culture report and/or antibiogram demonstrated either a microorganism not susceptible to or resistant to moxifloxacin. RESULTS: The study included 12 eyes of 12 patients (7 women; 58.33%; average age of 63 ± 20.11 years). All patients completed at least 1 month of follow-up. Patients had a diagnosis of infectious keratitis, and the SL was fitted on initial consultation. Of the 12 eyes, 7 had culture-positive bacterial infection, 2 eyes were mycotic, and 3 eyes had no culture growth. In 3 eyes, SL was discontinued because of the lack of response (one eye) and to the presence of mycotic infection (2 eyes). All infections resolved favorably at the final follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The use of SLs could be an alternative for antibiotic impregnation and treatment of infectious keratitis. No complications or side effects were observed related to the use of the scleral contact lens as a reservoir for the antibiotic. This treatment modality could offer a comfortable treatment for the patient, ensuring good impregnation and maintenance of antibiotic concentrations during the 24-hour wear periods.

Cool Crosslinking: Riboflavin at 4°C for Pain Management After Crosslinking for Keratoconus Patients, A Randomized Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: To explore corneal cooling as a method of pain management in corneal-accelerated collagen cross-linking. METHODS: This was a prospective and interventional randomized clinical trial registered in the National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials through the identifier NCT030760770. The research was conducted at the Institute of Ophthalmology "Conde de Valenciana." A total of 98 patients were randomly assigned to one of the following 2 groups: cold riboflavin (4°C) group or control group (riboflavin at room temperature). The inclusion criteria were patients of any sex, older than 18 years of age with keratoconus diagnosis who needed management with cross-linking in both eyes because of the evidence of progression. The exclusion criteria were patients who had cross-linking without epithelial debridement, unilateral cross-linking, or any other ocular pathologies besides keratoconus and any cognitive incapacity that would make the understanding of the pain test difficult. The main outcome measures were pain, tearing, photophobia, foreign body sensation, and irritation. RESULTS: At 2 hours post-op, pain in the case and control groups was 3.80 ± 3.00 and 8.08 ± 2.21 (P < 0.05), tearing was 1.56 ± 1.96 and 8.29 ± 2.42 (P < 0.05), photophobia was 5.44 ± 3.57 and 7.83 ± 2.64 (P < 0.05), foreign body sensation was 2.20 ± 2.78 and 6.54 ± 2.73 (P < 0.05), and irritation was 3.48 ± 2.98 and 6.79 ± 3.00 (P < 0.05), respectively. A statistical significant difference was maintained in pain values on day 1 (2.79 ± 3.09 and 4.91 ± 3.27 [P < 0.05]), 2 (2.54 ± 2.41 and 4.00 ± 2.43 [P < 0.05]), and 4 (0.45 ± 0.76 and 1.22 ± 1.67 [P < 0.05]). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that pain and associated symptoms decreased significantly in the riboflavin 4°C group.

Pain Management in Corneal Collagen Crosslinking for Keratoconus: A Comparative Case Series.

Purpose: To compare management of postoperative pain after corneal collagen crosslinking (CXL) with oral gabapentin or ketorolac. Methods: Prospective interventional comparative case series in a single center. Patients undergoing epithelium-off (epi-off) or epithelium-on (epi-on) techniques performed by a single surgeon for progressive keratoconus were enrolled and randomly assigned to the ketorolac (10-mg tablets every 8 h) or the gabapentin (300-mg capsules every 8 h) group and instructed to take the medication for the first 3 postoperative days. Using a numeric scale of pain, scores were assessed for current pain (at the time of applying the questionnaire), and average pain over the preceding 24 h. Eye symptoms and systemic adverse events related to oral medication were also assessed. Results: Thirty-seven patients were included, with 22 (10 epi-on and 12 epi-off) assigned to the ketorolac group and 15 (7 epi-on and 8 epi-off) to the gabapentin group. No statistically significant differences were noted on the pain scale between groups at any point of the study, in the median pain scores of patients at the time of applying the questionnaire, nor in the severity of pain during the 24-h period before the assessment. Also, no differences were found among groups for the eye symptoms and the systemic adverse events. The median regression analysis showed no effect of the type of surgery or gender in the severity of pain. Conclusions: Both oral ketorolac and oral gabapentin can be used with similar results for pain and symptomatic control after epi-on or epi-off CXL procedures.