Impaired corneal wound healing associated with ketorolac 0.5% after uncomplicated extracapsular cataract extraction.

PURPOSE: To describe an apparent association between the use of ketorolac 0.5% (Acular; Allergan) for cystoid macular edema (CME) prophylaxis and impaired corneal wound healing in patients undergoing extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. METHODS: A retrospective case series reviewing 7 eyes of 7 patients who underwent uncomplicated ECCE with IOL implantation and were treated postoperatively with ketorolac 0.5% 4 times daily as a prophylactic measure against CME. RESULTS: Patients were treated with ketorolac 0.5% 4 times a day for an average of 30 days (range, 20-44 days) after uncomplicated ECCE with IOL implantation. Two eyes developed postoperative endophthalmitis necessitating vitreous tap with intravitreal antibiotic injection; 1 eye went on to require pars plana vitrectomy with corneal wound resuturing. One eye developed corneal wound dehiscence that required wound resuturing in the operating room. One eye developed an inadvertent filtering bleb despite the lack of postoperative suture lysis. Three others were followed up closely postoperatively with slit-lamp evidence of impaired wound healing, manifested by wound avascularity and/or wound gape, and did not require surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents for prophylaxis of CME after cataract surgery is an evolving trend. This retrospective case series showed a possible link between the use of ketorolac 0.5% and impaired corneal wound healing, and caution is urged in the liberal use of this agent postoperatively after ECCE.

Ocular findings as predictors of carotid artery occlusive disease: is carotid imaging justified?

OBJECTIVES: Hemispheric neurologic symptoms, amaurosis fugax, and Hollenhorst plaques at eye examination are standard indications for carotid imaging to identify carotid artery occlusive disease (CAOD). Previous reports have suggested that other ocular findings, such as retinal artery occlusion and anterior ischemic optic neuropathy, are associated with CAOD. However, the predictive value of ocular findings for the presence of CAOD is controversial. The purpose of this study was to define the predictive value of ocular symptoms and ophthalmologic examination in identifying significant CAOD. METHODS: Over 3 years 145 patients were referred for carotid imaging on the basis of ocular indications in 160 eyes. Forty patients were excluded because of concurrent non-ocular indications for carotid imaging, leaving 105 patients referred exclusively for ocular indications to evaluate. Ophthalmologic history and eye examination were correlated with carotid duplex ultrasound findings. RESULTS: Amaurosis fugax was associated with a positive scan in 20.0% of carotid arteries (P =.022). Hollenhorst plaques at fundoscopic examination were associated with a positive scan in 18.2% of carotid arteries (P =.02). Ocular findings exclusive of Hollenhorst plaques were particularly poor predictors of CAOD, inasmuch as only 1 of 64 arteries (1.6%) had significant ipsilateral internal carotid artery stenosis (P =.022). Venous stasis retinopathy was the only ocular finding other than Hollenhorst plaques with any predictive value (1 of 5 scans positive; positive predictive value, 20.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Ocular symptoms and findings are poor predictors of CAOD. Amaurosis fugax, Hollenhorst plaques, and venous stasis retinopathy demonstrated moderate predictive value, whereas all other ocular findings demonstrated no predictive value in identifying CAOD.