In Vivo Correlation Between Macular Pigment Optical Volume and Retinal Layers Thickness.

Purpose: This study aims to investigate the potential in vivo relationship between macular pigment (MP) and retinal layers thickness in healthy subjects and dry, non-advanced age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Methods: An observational, cross-sectional study was conducted. Healthy subjects >40 years and patients with early or intermediate AMD were recruited. Structural OCT and macular pigment optical volume (MPOV) were collected for each subject. Retinal layers parameters were calculated based on the standard early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (ETDRS) map. Additionally, MPOV within 1°, 2°, and 9° of eccentricity was assessed and associated with retinal layers thickness and volume. Linear mixed-effects models were used to test the relationship between MP and structural OCT parameters, while adjusting for known possible confounding factors. Results: A total of 144 eyes of 91 subjects (60.4% females) were evaluated, comprising 43% normal eyes and 57% with early/intermediate AMD. Among the retinal layers, only the outer nuclear layer (ONL) thickness and volume appeared to be associated to higher MP levels. Specifically, the central ONL thickness was identified as a significant predictor of the MPOV 1°(P = 0.04), while the parafoveal ONL thickness (inner ETDRS subfield) was identified as a significant fixed effect on the MPOV 9° (P = 0.037). Age and the presence of drusen or subretinal drusenoid deposits were also tested without showing significant correlations. Conclusions: Among the retinal layers examined, only the ONL thickness demonstrated a significant association with MPOV. Consequently, ONL thickness might serve as a potential biomarker related to MP levels.

Adaptive Optics of Kyrieleis Plaques in Varicella Zoster Virus-Associated Posterior Uveitis: A Multimodal Imaging Analysis.

Kyrieleis plaques (KP) represent a peculiar type of vasculitis affecting retinal arterial branches in a beaded segmental pattern that can be found in several posterior inflammatory ocular conditions. The nature and precise location of KP is unclear. Adaptive Optics (AO) provides an in vivo visualization of retinal vasculature on a microscopic level, thus permitting a more detailed characterization of KP as compared to traditional imaging techniques. This study aims to report AO imaging of KP in Varicella Zoster virus (VZV)-associated posterior uveitis and to correlate the findings with traditional imaging techniques. Three patients diagnosed with VZV posterior uveitis underwent adaptive optics (AO) imaging and traditional multimodal imaging techniques, including fundus photography, fluorescein angiography, indocyanine green angiography and optical coherence tomography. In all subjects, AO imaging revealed segmental hyporeflectivity confined to the vessel wall, with no evidence of arterial wall disruption or extravascular involvement. In our series, AO findings support the view that KP are localized within the inner arterial wall, possibly at the endothelial level.

New ophthalmic dual-viscoelastic device in cataract surgery: a comparative study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance and safety in cataract surgery of two ophthalmic viscoelastic devices (OVDs), each having separate dispersive and cohesive characteristics and different concentrations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this prospective, randomised, controlled clinical study, one eye of each patient was injected with OVD1 (Viscopack14) or OVD2 (DuoVisc) during phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation. Endothelial cell count, intraocular pressure (IOP), central corneal thickness (CCT), intraocular inflammation and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) were compared 3 months postoperatively. RESULTS: The study enrolled 127 patients. Randomisation assigned 50 eyes of as many patients to each arm of the study. The postoperative mean endothelial cell loss was 14.4% and 7.1% from baseline in the OVD1 and OVD2 groups, respectively (p=0.08). The incidence of IOP spikes at 2 hours was 0% and 8%, respectively (p=0.02). There were intergroup differences in postoperative IOP values, the OVD2 group showed significantly higher values at all of the follow-up visits starting from the 24 hours examination (p<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the CCT, intraocular inflammation and CDVA at the end of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Both OVDs showed similar clinical performances and were equally effective during cataract surgery. Viscopack14 showed more corneal endothelial cell reduction, while DuoVisc had more occurrences of IOP values and spikes. Future studies are mandatory to support these preliminary results.

Visual performance after bilateral implantation of 2 new presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses: Trifocal versus extended range of vision.

PURPOSE: To compare the visual outcomes and quality of vision of 2 new diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) with those of a monofocal IOL. SETTING: Fatebenefratelli e Oftalmico Hospital, Milan, Italy. DESIGN: Prospective case series. METHODS: Patients had bilateral cataract surgery with implantation of a trifocal IOL (Panoptix), an extended-range-of-vision IOL (Symfony), or a monofocal IOL (SN60WF). Postoperative examinations included assessing distance, intermediate, and near visual acuity; binocular defocus; intraocular and total aberrations; point-spread function (PSF); modulation transfer function (MTF); retinal straylight; and quality-of-vision (QoV) and spectacle-dependence questionnaires. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients (152 eyes) were assessed for study eligibility. Twenty patients (40 eyes) in each arm of the study (60 patients, 120 eyes) completed the outcome assessment. At the 4-month follow-up, the trifocal group had significantly better near visual acuity than the extended-range-of-vision group (P = .005). The defocus curve showed the trifocal IOL had better intermediate/near performance than the extended-range-of-vision IOL and both multifocal IOLs performed better than the monofocal IOL. Intragroup comparison of the total higher-order aberrations, PSF, MTF, and retinal straylight were not statistically different. The QoV questionnaire results showed no differences in dysphotopsia between the multifocal IOL groups; however, the results were significantly higher than in the monofocal IOL group. CONCLUSIONS: Both multifocal IOLs seemed to be good options for patients with intermediate-vision requirements, whereas the trifocal IOL might be better for patients with near-vision requirements. The significant perception of visual side effects indicates that patients still must be counseled about these effects before a multifocal IOL is implanted.