Successful Management of Pythium insidiosum Keratitis Masquerading as Dematiaceous Fungal Keratitis in an Immunosuppressed Asian Male.

PURPOSE: To describe the first case of Pythium insidiosum keratitis masquerading as dematiaceous fungal keratitis in a seropositive male. CASE SUMMARY: A 44-year-old seropositive male previously treated for acute retinal necrosis presented with pain and defective vision in the right eye following a mud injury 5 days back. Presenting visual acuity was hand movements close to the face. Ocular examination revealed a 7 × 7 mm dense, greyish-white mid stromal infiltrate with pigmentation and few tentacles. The clinical diagnosis suggested fungal keratitis. Corneal scraping on 10% KOH and Gram stain revealed slender, aseptate hyaline hyphae. Before culture results, the patient was treated with topical 5% natamycin and 1% voriconazole, but the infiltrate progressed. Culture on 5% sheep blood agar revealed white fluffy, submerged, shiny, and appressed colonies, and Pythium insidiosum was confirmed by zoospore formation. The patient was further managed with topical linezolid 0.2% hourly, azithromycin 1% hourly, and adjuvant drugs. CONCLUSION: This is an uncommon presentation of Pythium keratitis masquerading as dematiaceous fungal keratitis in an immunocompromised male.

Corneal Perforation Secondary to Rosacea Keratitis Managed with Excellent Visual Outcome.

INTRODUCTION: Ocular Rosacea is a poly etiological chronic inflammatory disease with heterogeneous clinical manifestations. It is primarily a dermatologic disease, which often manifests in the eyes affecting eyelids, conjunctiva, and cornea. The leading role in the pathological process belongs to the disruption of regulatory mechanisms in the vascular, immune, and nervous systems. The varied manifestation can be erythematous pustular lesions on the face, chronic blepharitis, meibomian gland dysfunction, evaporative dry eye, peripheral corneal ulceration, corneal scarring, perforation, and neovascularization. CASE: We describe a rare case report of a 43-year-old male with progressive ocular manifestations of rosacea keratitis. Slit-lamp biomicroscopic examination revealed squamous blepharitis, telangiectatic vessels with obliterated meibomian glands, circumcorneal congestion, peripheral corneal perforation of 2x2 mm at 4 0 clock, shallow anterior chamber(AC) with positive seidel's in the left eye. Fundoscopy showed serous choroidal detachment(CD). Snellen's Best Corrected Visual Acuity(BCVA) was 20/240 with Intraocular pressure measured was 5 mmhg. The patient was managed with topical loteprednol, moxifloxacin, carboxymethylcellulose medications along with cyanoacrylate glue and bandage contact lens and had excellent visual acuity of 20/20 with a follow-up of 1 year. CONCLUSION: Ocular rosacea perforation has been reported in chronic cases and may not always require amniotic membrane transplant, patch grafting, or keratoplasty. If managed meticulously with cyanoacrylate glue and BCL can have excellent outcomes. Eye specialists should be alerted that the key to a successful outcome is excellent control of inflammatory activity and differentiating this non-infectious keratitis from other keratitis before commencing treatment.

Barriers in utilisation of low vision assistive products.

AIM: To understand the barriers in utilisation of low vision assistive products (LVAPs) from the perspective of patients with low vision. METHODS: Patients referred to low vision clinic in a tertiary eye care hospital in India who were prescribed LVAPs but were un-willing to accept the products were interviewed using questionnaires. Data pertaining to the age, diagnosis, gender, occupation, preferred LVAPs, patient's perception of vision loss and the primary reason for non-acceptance of LVAPs were analysed. RESULTS: A total of 235 among the 413 patients who noticed improvement in visual performance with LVAPs were unwilling to utilise these products. The questionnaire revealed that 53% of the patients who felt they were not candidates for LVAPs were experiencing severe visual impairment (p < 0.02). Non-acceptance was highest (68.6%) in patients < 15 years of age. The most common causes of non-acceptance were social stigma in patients < 40 years (41.3%; p < 0.0001), fear of loss of employment in patients 41-60 years (26.6%; p < 0.01) and low necessity in patients > 60 years (25%; p < 0.001). Denial of the magnitude of their illness was more common in patients above 60 years (16.5%). Non-acceptance rate was lowest for macular disorders (39.6%) and highest for retinitis pigmentosa (81%). Among devices, hand and stand magnifiers had the lowest non-acceptance rate (41%). Telescopes and electronic devices had the highest rate of non-acceptance (92% and 89%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Reasons for poor utilisation of LVAPs are multifactorial extending beyond affordability or accessibility. Knowledge of these barriers can help in creating content for awareness campaigns among patients, healthcare professionals and general society. Further research is necessary on the psychological and psycho social contributors to this process.