Five-Year Risk and Safety Profile of Autologous Serum Eye Drop Therapy.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the risk and safety profile of autologous serum eye drop therapy in clinical routine over a period of 5 years. METHODS: This retrospective study involved all patients treated with autologous serum between July 2014 and December 2019 at a tertiary ophthalmic referral center. The electronic patient record system was searched for all patients with autologous serum eye drop therapy at any time point. These records were subsequently searched for keywords such as infectious keratitis, corneal ulcer, conjunctivitis, or endophthalmitis at any recorded contact. The probability of an association between the therapy with autologous serum eye drops and infectious complications was investigated independently by three corneal specialists and rated as likely, potential, or unlikely. RESULTS: In total, 752 patients were treated with autologous serum eye drops between July 2014 and December 2019. There were 5 384 batches with a total of 107 680 bottles of serum eye drops that had been produced and dispensed for these patients during this period. The records of 291 patient showed a combination of autologous serum therapy and at least one keyword for infectious diseases. In 288 patients, individual case analyses revealed an unlikely association between the therapy and infection, as their infectious episodes occurred either before the start of the therapy, more than 1 month after the therapy ceased, or in the contralateral untreated eye in the case of unilateral therapy. Three cases of infectious keratitis were classified as potentially associated with autologous serum therapy. However, all three patients suffered from chronic anterior eye diseases with a high risk of spontaneous infectious complications independent of therapy with autologous eye drops. None of the infectious events was rated as being likely due to the serum eye drops. CONCLUSIONS: Serum eye drops are often used in patients with severe or chronic anterior eye diseases with an intrinsic risk of infectious diseases. Despite these preexisting risk factors, autologous serum eye drops can be considered safe, even in patients with a compromised ocular surface.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) with Refractive and Diffractive Extended Depth of Focus (EDOF) Intraocular Lenses.

BACKGROUND: Extended depth of focus intraocular lenses (EDOF-IOLs) provide unaided far- and mid-range vision. Refractive IOLs, in contrast to diffractive designs, are associated with a lower depth of focus and absence of dysphotopsia. The aim of this study was to assess spectacle independence for far-range, mid-range, and near-vision activities in patients after implantation of refractive or diffractive EDOF-IOLs using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in a real-world setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In 2021 and 2022, all patients in a single center referred for bilateral cataract surgery were assigned to 7 experienced cataract surgeons who either bilaterally implanted only a diffractive EDOF-IOL (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, AT LARA Jena, Germany, three surgeons) or refractive EDOF-IOL (Johnson & Johnson Vision Inc., Tecnis Eyhance Irvine, California, USA, four surgeons) at the surgeon's discretion, with the aim of bilateral emmetropia. Six months after both cataract surgeries, all patients were contacted by telephone and asked to report their outcomes using a structured questionnaire investigating their spectacle usage for various daily activities and their experience with night glare or halos. Inclusion criteria were a normal postoperative visual potential based on the preoperative examination and completion of the questionnaire regarding postoperative visual experience. RESULTS: Of the patients, 514 underwent bilateral cataract surgery aiming for bilateral emmetropia with the implantation of EDOF-IOLs (422 with Tecnis Eyhance and 92 with AT LARA). A complete questionnaire was obtained from 472 (92%) patients, who were included in the study (393 vs. 79). Comparing Tecnis Eyhance with AT LARA IOL, 54 vs. 57% patients were able to perform most of their daily activities without spectacles, 9 vs. 19% reported not being dependent on spectacles at all, 25 vs. 29% reported using their smartphones without spectacles, 15 vs. 49% patients reported experiencing glares or halos at night, and 1 vs.15% with driving disturbance. Overall, 95 vs. 93% patients described themselves as "satisfied" or "highly satisfied" with their IOL. CONCLUSIONS: With both types of EDOF-IOLs, the majority of patients could perform most of their daily activities without spectacles, except reading, and were highly satisfied with their IOLs. Patients with diffractive Zeiss AT LARA EDOF-IOLs were more likely to accomplish unaided near-range visual tasks; however, they were also at a higher risk of experiencing glares or halos at night.