Case-matched comparison of vitrectomy, peripheral retinal endolaser, and endocyclophotocoagulation versus standard care in neovascular glaucoma.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of combination pars plana vitrectomy, endoscopic peripheral panretinal photocoagulation, and endocyclophotocoagulation (ECP) as compared with standard care in patients with neovascular glaucoma. METHODS: This age-matched case-controlled retrospective series of 54 eyes compared the clinical outcomes between a consecutive series of combination pars plana vitrectomy/panretinal photocoagulation/ECP (n = 27) versus the current standard of care (n = 27) for patients with neovascular glaucoma. "Standard" treatments for patients with neovascular glaucoma include panretinal photocoagulation, intravitreal bevacizumab, filtration surgery, pars plana vitrectomy, and Ahmed valve placement. RESULTS: After 1 year, mean intraocular pressure reduced from 40.7 ± 12.40 mmHg preoperatively to 12.3 ± 4.84 mmHg (P < 0.001) in the ECP group and from 34.7 ± 12.38 mmHg to 23.2 ± 12.34 mmHg in the control group (P = 0.002). Compared with controls, the mean drop in intraocular pressure in the ECP group was significantly greater at all postoperative visits. Logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution visual acuity outcomes were similar in both groups. There were 2 cases (7.4%) of postoperative phthisis bulbi in each group. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic pars plana vitrectomy, panretinal photocoagulation, and ECP seem to control intraocular pressure to a greater extent than standard glaucoma treatments in patients with neovascular glaucoma. In this aged-matched comparative case series, there was no significant difference between the two treatments' effects on visual acuity.

Ocular blast injuries in mass-casualty incidents: the marathon bombing in Boston, Massachusetts, and the fertilizer plant explosion in West, Texas.

PURPOSE: To report the ocular injuries sustained by survivors of the April 15, 2013, Boston Marathon bombing and the April 17, 2013, fertilizer plant explosion in West, Texas. DESIGN: Multicenter, cross-sectional, retrospective, comparative case series. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-two eyes of 36 patients treated at 12 institutions were included in the study. METHODS: Ocular and systemic trauma data were collected from medical records. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Types and severity of ocular and systemic trauma and associations with mechanisms of injury. RESULTS: In the Boston cohort, 164 of 264 casualties were transported to level 1 trauma centers, and 22 (13.4%) required ophthalmology consultations. In the West cohort, 218 of 263 total casualties were transported to participating centers, of which 14 (6.4%) required ophthalmology consultations. Boston had significantly shorter mean distances to treating facilities (1.6 miles vs. 53.6 miles; P = 0.004). Overall, rigid eye shields were more likely not to have been provided than to have been provided on the scene (P<0.001). Isolated upper body and facial wounds were more common in West largely because of shattered windows (75.0% vs. 13.6%; P = 0.001), resulting in more open-globe injuries (42.9% vs. 4.5%; P = 0.008). Patients in Boston sustained more lower extremity injuries because of the ground-level bomb. Overall, 27.8% of consultations were called from emergency rooms, whereas the rest occurred afterward. Challenges in logistics and communications were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Ocular injuries are common and potentially blinding in mass-casualty incidents. Systemic and ocular polytrauma is the rule in terrorism, whereas isolated ocular injuries are more common in other calamities. Key lessons learned included educating the public to stay away from windows during disasters, promoting use of rigid eye shields by first responders, the importance of reliable communications, deepening the ophthalmology call algorithm, the significance of visual incapacitation resulting from loss of spectacles, improving the rate of early detection of ocular injuries in emergency departments, and integrating ophthalmology services into trauma teams as well as maintaining a voice in hospital-wide and community-based disaster planning.

Care of Older Adults: Role of Primary Care Physicians in the Treatment of Cataracts and Macular Degeneration.

This article aims to facilitate optimal management of cataracts and age-related macular degeneration (AMD) by providing information on indications, risk factors, referral guidelines, and treatments and to describe techniques to maximize quality of life (QOL) for people with irreversible vision loss. A review of PubMed and other online databases was performed for peer-reviewed English-language articles from 1980 through August 2012 on visual impairment in elderly adults. Search terms included vision loss, visual impairment, blind, low vision, QOL combined with age-related, elderly, and aging. Articles were selected that discussed vision loss in elderly adults, effects of vision impairment on QOL, and care strategies to manage vision loss in older adults. The ability of primary care physicians (PCPs) to identify early signs of cataracts and AMD in individuals at risk of vision loss is critical to early diagnosis and management of these common age-related eye diseases. PCPs can help preserve vision by issuing aptly timed referrals and encouraging behavioral modifications that reduce risk factors. With knowledge of referral guidelines for soliciting low-vision rehabilitation services, visual aids, and community support resources, PCPs can considerably increase the QOL of individuals with uncorrectable vision loss. By offering appropriately timed referrals, promoting behavioral modifications, and allocating low-vision care resources, PCPs may play a critical role in preserving visual health and enhancing the QOL for the elderly population.