Accuracy of the Barrett Universal II formula integrated into a commercially available optical biometer when using a preloaded single-piece intraocular lens.

PURPOSE: To compare the commonly used formulas for intraocular lens (IOL) selection using IOLMaster®700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec) and to evaluate the Barrett Universal II (BU-II) formula accuracy when using the Vivinex™ iSert® XY1 IOL (Hoya Corporation Medical Division). METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed that included patients who underwent uneventful cataract surgery with in-the-bag insertion of Vivinex™ iSert® XY1 IOL. Prediction errors at 3 months postoperative of IOLMaster® 700 with Haigis, Holladay 1, SRK/T, and BU-II formulas were compared. As a subgroup analysis, we focused on the axial length (AL) and IOL power. AL subgroup analysis was based on the following AL subgroups: short (<22.5 mm), medium (22.5-25.5 mm), and long (>25.5 mm). IOL power subgroup analysis was based on the following IOL power subgroups: low (≤18.0 diopters [D]), medium (18.5-24.0 D), and high (≥24.5 D). RESULTS: This study included 590 eyes of 590 patients. Overall, the four IOL calculation formulas appeared to be similarly accurate. In the long AL subgroup, the BU-II formula had a significantly lower absolute error (AE) than the Holladay 1 formula. In the low-power subgroup, the BU-II formula had a significantly lower AE than the Holladay 1 and SRK/T formulas. On the other hand, in the high-power subgroup, the BU-Ⅱ formula was significantly less accurate than the SRK/T formula and also appeared to be worse than the Holladay 1 formula (P = 0.052). CONCLUSION: The BU-II formula might be less accurate when using a Vivinex™ iSert® XY1 IOL of 24.5 D or greater.

Prospective clinical evaluation of 1.5% levofloxacin ophthalmic solution in ophthalmic perioperative disinfection.

PURPOSE: Gram-positive cocci and Propionibacterium acnes are widely reported agents of infectious postoperative endophthalmitis. This multicenter study was conducted to evaluate the eradication effectiveness and safety profile of levofloxacin 1.5% ophthalmic solution (LVFX 1.5%) for use in perioperative disinfection. METHODS: Patients who were scheduled for cataract surgery were enrolled. The perioperative regimen of LVFX 1.5% was administered 3 times daily as follows: preoperative 3 days; the day of surgery (in the morning, 1 h before surgery, and immediately after surgery); and postoperative 2 weeks. Conjunctival sac scrapings were collected 3 times in the observation period; before preoperative administration, before iodine eyewash on the day of surgery, and after completion of postoperative administration. Isolated and identified microbial strains were assessed for antibacterial susceptibility. RESULTS: One hundred patients were enrolled and data obtained from 96 patients (mean age, 72.7 ± 8.9 years). The preoperative eradication rate was 86.7% in total microbes. In the case of gram-positive cocci, the preoperative eradication rate was 100%, even though there were LVFX-registrant methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococcus, which had a high minimum inhibitory concentration against LVFX, such as 32 µg/mL. On the other hand, that of P. acnes was 78.3%. No acquired drug resistance was suspected in all strains. Adverse drug reactions occurred in 4.2% patients, and all were slight. CONCLUSIONS: For ophthalmic perioperative disinfection, the LVFX 1.5% ophthalmic solution showed a good safety profile, and critical eradication of gram-positive cocci, including the fluoroquinolone-resistant strains.

Platelet-activating factor in human normal tears.

PURPOSE: To measure the concentrations of platelet-activating factor (PAF) and lyso-PAF in tears of human eyes. METHODS: Unilateral tear samples were collected from the conjunctival cul-de-sac of 12 healthy volunteers without any past histories of ocular surface diseases and 10 patients with allergic conjunctivitis (AC) by graduated disposable microcapillaries. C18:0-PAF, C18:0-lyso-PAF, C16:0-PAF, and C16:0-lyso-PAF levels were determined by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS). RESULTS: The concentrations of C18:0-PAF, C18:0-lyso-PAF, C16:0-PAF, and C16:0-lyso-PAF in tears from healthy volunteers were 0.44 +/- 0.39, 51.7 +/- 63.4, 61.9 +/- 75.9, and 10.7 +/- 14.7 ng/ml, respectively. Higher, but not significantly different, concentrations of all the four kinds of PAF molecules were detected in tears from AC patients. Significant correlations were demonstrated between the concentrations of C18:0-PAF and C18:0-lyso-PAF (r = 0.906; p < 0.01 in normal healthy volunteers and r = 0.939; p < 0.01 in AC patients), and between those of C16:0-PAF and C16:0-lyso-PAF (r = 0.944; p < 0.01 in normal healthy volunteers and r = 0.806; p = 0.015 in AC patients). Moreover, C18:0-PAF concentrations correlated significantly with those of C16:0-PAF (r = 0.885; p < 0.01 in normal healthy volunteers and r = 0.927; p < 0.01 in AC patients), while C18:0-lyso-PAF concentrations correlated significantly with those of C16:0-lyso-PAF (r = 0.972; p < 0.01 in normal healthy volunteers and r = 0.891; p < 0.01 in AC patients). CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first report of the concentrations of different species of PAF (C18:0-PAF, C18:0-lyso-PAF, C16:0-PAF, and C16:0-lyso-PAF) in human tears.

Immunohistochemical study of epiretinal proliferative cellular tissue from a patient with sarcoidosis.

BACKGROUND: Sarcoidosis is a granulomatous disease causing uveitis. Although steroid therapy is usually effective for many patients, some are resistant to this therapy. In such cases, vitrectomy may be chosen as the therapeutic method to treat intraocular inflammation. CASE: A 26-year-old Japanese man was diagnosed as having sarcoidosis by clinical findings and histological examination of bronchoalveolar lavage. OBSERVATION: One year after diagnosis, vitreous opacity worsened and pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) was performed. Six months later, recurrence of vitreous opacity appeared and severe retinal exudative changes with proliferative vitreoretinopathy developed. One year after the first operation, PPV was repeated and the epiretinal proliferative tissue was removed and examined. CONCLUSIONS: Histologic examination of the specimen showed scattered noncaseating granulomatous inflammation mainly consisting of epithelioid histiocytes and lymphocytes. Plasma cells as well as T cells were identified and the predominance of CD8-positive T cells was demonstrated. Taking everything into consideration, a new finding of CD8 predominance in the epiretinal proliferative tissue was demonstrated.