Evolving Trends for the Clinical Presentation of Primary Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachments From Early to Late Phases of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact on trends in clinical presentation of acute, primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachments (RRD) from early to late phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This study was a single-center, consecutive case series of 1,727 patients treated after vaccine availability ("late"; 3/29/21 to 9/26/21), corresponding time frame in previous year of pandemic ("early"; 3/30/20 to 9/27/20), and prior to pandemic ("pre"; 4/1/19 to 9/29/19). Primary outcome was proportion of patients presenting with macula-off RRD. Secondary outcomes included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and primary proliferative vitreoretinopathy (PVR). RESULTS: While macula-off RRD rates were significantly (P < 0.0001) elevated in early and late cohorts compared to the pre cohort, only the early cohort showed a significant (P < 0.0001) increase in both primary PVR presentation and complex RRD repair. Patients lost to follow-up in early cohort were significantly (P < 0.0001) higher than others. Early cohort showed significantly (P < 0.0001) worse final BCVA compared to others. CONCLUSION: Patients in late pandemic were less likely to exhibit clinical features of worse RRD disease and have improved visual outcomes compared to those in early pandemic. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina 2023;54:78-83.].

COVID-19 Vaccination Hesitancy and Its Association With Altered Presentation of Primary Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment.

PURPOSE: Evaluate factors associated with coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy and clinical trends in primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachments (RRDs) during the first year of vaccine availability. DESIGN: Single-center, clinical cohort study. METHODS: Consecutive patients from December 14, 2020, to December 12, 2021, presenting vaccinated (Prior-), subsequently vaccinated (Later-), or remaining unvaccinated (Never-Vax). Primary outcome was proportion with macula-off (mac-off) RRD. Secondary outcomes included logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), primary proliferative vitreoretinopathy (PVR), proportion lost to follow-up, and distance traveled. RESULTS: 1047 patients were divided into 391 Prior-, 252 Later-, and 404 Never-Vax cohorts. Significantly greater proportions of Later- and Never-Vax cohorts presented with mac-off RRDs (Prior-Vax = 44.5%; Later-Vax = 54%, P < .0001; Never-Vax = 57.9%, P < .0001) and primary PVR (Prior-Vax = 4.3%; Later-Vax = 13.6%, P < .0001; Never-Vax = 17.1%, P < .0001) compared to Prior-Vax cohort. Significantly greater proportion of Never-Vax cohort (7.7%, P < .0001) were lost to follow-up compared to Prior- (2.3%) and Later-Vax (2.2%) cohorts. Never-Vax cohort (median = 35 miles) traveled farther compared to Prior- (median = 22.3 miles; P < .0001) and Later-Vax cohorts (25.45 miles; P = .0038). Prior-Vax cohort had significantly better (P < .05) initial (median = 0.30 logMAR) and final (0.18 logMAR) BCVA compared to Later- (Initial: 0.54 logMAR; Final: 0.30 logMAR) and Never-Vax (Initial: 0.70 logMAR; Final: 0.40 logMAR) cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is associated with worse clinical presentation and outcomes for primary RRD.

Trends in the Clinical Presentation of Primary Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachments During the First Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of 1 full year of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on clinical presentation of acute, primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD). DESIGN: Single-center, retrospective observational cohort study. METHODS: Patients were divided into 2 cohorts: consecutive patients treated for primary RRD during the COVID-19 pandemic (March 9, 2020, to March 7, 2021; pandemic cohort) and patients treated during the corresponding time in previous year (March 11, 2019, to March 8, 2020; control cohort). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of patients presenting with macula-involving (mac-off) or macula-sparring (mac-on) RRD. RESULTS: A total of 952 patients in the pandemic cohort and 872 patients in the control cohort were included. Demographic factors were similar. Compared with the control cohort, a significantly greater number of pandemic cohort patients presented with mac-off RRDs ([60.92%] pandemic, [48.17%] control, P = .0001) and primary proliferative vitreoretinopathy ([15.53%] pandemic, [6.9%] control, P = .0001). Pandemic cohort patients (10.81%) had significantly higher rates of lost to follow-up compared with the control cohort (4.43%; P = .0001). Patients new to our clinic demonstrated a significant increase in mac-off RRDs in the pandemic cohort (65.35%) compared with the control cohort (50.40%; P = .0001). Pandemic cohort patients showed worse median final best-corrected visual acuity (0.30 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) compared with the control cohort (0.18 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution; P = .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with primary RRD during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic were more likely to have mac-off disease, present with primary proliferative vitreoretinopathy, be lost to follow-up, and have worse final best-corrected visual acuity outcomes.

The Influence of Universal Face Mask Use on Endophthalmitis Risk after Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Injections.

PURPOSE: Routine use of face masks for patients and physicians during intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections has increased with the emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. This study evaluates the impact of universal face mask use on rates and outcomes of post-injection endophthalmitis (PIE). DESIGN: Retrospective, multicenter, comparative cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Eyes receiving intravitreal anti-VEGF injections from October 1, 2019, to July 31, 2020, at 12 centers. METHODS: Cases were divided into a "no face mask" group if no face masks were worn by the physician or patient during intravitreal injections or a "universal face mask" group if face masks were worn by the physician, ancillary staff, and patient during intravitreal injections. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rate of endophthalmitis, microbial spectrum, and visual acuity (VA). RESULTS: Of 505 968 intravitreal injections administered in 110 547 eyes, 85 of 294 514 (0.0289%; 1 in 3464 injections) cases of presumed endophthalmitis occurred in the "no face mask" group, and 45 of 211 454 (0.0213%; 1 in 4699) cases occurred in the "universal face mask" group (odds ratio [OR], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51-1.18; P = 0.097). In the "no face mask" group, there were 27 cases (0.0092%; 1 in 10 908 injections) of culture-positive endophthalmitis compared with 9 cases (0.004%; 1 in 23 494) in the "universal face mask" group (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.22-0.99; P = 0.041). Three cases of oral flora-associated endophthalmitis occurred in the "no face mask" group (0.001%; 1 in 98 171 injections) compared with 1 (0.0005%; 1 in 211 454) in the "universal face mask" group (P = 0.645). Patients presented a mean (range) 4.9 (1-30) days after the causative injection, and mean logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) VA at endophthalmitis presentation was 2.04 (~20/2200) for "no face mask" group compared with 1.65 (~20/900) for the "universal face mask" group (P = 0.022), although no difference was observed 3 months after treatment (P = 0.764). CONCLUSIONS: In a large, multicenter, retrospective study, physician and patient face mask use during intravitreal anti-VEGF injections did not alter the risk of presumed acute-onset bacterial endophthalmitis, but there was a reduced rate of culture-positive endophthalmitis. Three months after presentation, there was no difference in VA between the groups.