Gender differences in retinal diseases: A review.

Gender medicine is a medical specialty that addresses gender differences in health and disease. Traditionally, medical research and clinical practice have often been focused on male subjects and patients. As a result, gender differences in medicine have been overlooked. Gender medicine considers the biological, psychological, and social differences between the genders and how these differences affect the development, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease. For ophthalmological diseases epidemiological differences are known. However, there are not yet any gender-based ophthalmic treatment approaches for women and men. This review provides an overview of gender differences in retinal diseases. It is intended to make ophthalmologists, especially retinologists, more sensitive to the topic of gender medicine. The goal is to enhance comprehension of these aspects by highlighting fundamental gender differences. Integrating gender medicine into ophthalmological practice helps promote personalized and gender-responsive health care and makes medical research more accurate and relevant to the entire population.

Acute corneal melt and perforation - A possible complication after riboflavin/UV-A crosslinking (CXL) in keratoconus.

Purpose: To report two cases of acute corneal melting and perforation requiring emergency penetrating keratoplasty after corneal crosslinking (CXL) in advanced keratoconus. Observations: Case 1 was a 34 and case 2 was a 16-year old male, both with progressive keratoconus, who underwent CXL (Dresden protocol). After riboflavin imbibition, patients had a minimal pachymetry of 337 µm and 347 µm, and therefore required stromal swelling by hypoosmolar riboflavin resulting in pachymetries of 470 µm and 422 µm, prior to the 30 minute UV-irradiation with 3mW/cm2. In case 1, on the 7th postoperative day a 4mm linear perforation occurred. Extensive post-hoc examinations revealed no infectious cause. In case 2, a corneal melting developed within 24 hours, from which Staphylococcus aureus was cultured. Conclusions and importance: Acute corneal melting and perforation may occur after CXL. Dysfunctional collagen metabolism, atopia, thin preoperative pachymetry and the use of hypoosmolar substances may have initiated this complication in our cases.

Microbiological Testing of Split-Cornea Transplantation.

PURPOSE: By splitting a donor cornea into an anterior and a posterior donor lamella, the need for donor tissue can be reduced in times of lack of donors. Current eye bank regulations limit the use of each donor cornea to one recipient. METHODS: The anterior lamella not applied to the patient after each sterile DMEK preparation performed was stored for one week and was microbiologically controlled on day 7. RESULTS: Between October 2020 and December 2021, microbiological controls of 108 consecutive anterior lamellae were performed at the Department of Ophthalmology, University of Duesseldorf, without any contamination found. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest split-cornea transplantation is a microbiologically safe procedure.

Endovascular stroke therapy may be safe in patients with elevated international normalized ratio.

INTRODUCTION: Endovascular therapy in acute ischemic stroke is safe and efficient. However, patients receiving oral anticoagulation were excluded in the larger trials. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the safety of endovascular therapy in patients with acute ischemic stroke and elevated international normalized ratio (INR) values. METHODS: Retrospective database review of a tertiary care university hospital for patients with anterior circulation stroke treated with endovascular therapy. Patients with anticoagulation other than vitamin K antagonists were excluded. The primary safety endpoint was defined as symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH; ECASS II definition). The efficacy endpoint was the modified Rankin scale (mRS) score after 3 months, dichotomized into favorable outcome (mRS 0-2) and unfavorable outcome (mRS 3-6). RESULTS: 435 patients were included. 90% were treated with stent retriever. 27 (6.2%) patients with an INR of 1.2-1.7 and 21 (4.8%) with an INR >1.7. 33 (7.6%) had sICH and 149 patients (34.3%) had a favorable outcome. Patients with an elevated INR did not have an increased risk for sICH or unfavorable outcome in multivariable analysis. The additional use of IV thrombolysis in patients with an INR of 1.2-1.7 did not increase the risk of sICH or unfavorable outcome. These results were replicated in a sensitivity analysis introducing an error of the INR of ±5%. They were also confirmed using other sICH definitions (Safe Implementation of Thrombolysis in Stroke (SITS), National Institute of neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), Heidelberg bleeding classification). CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular therapy in patients with an elevated INR is safe and efficient. Patients with an INR of 1.2-1.7 may be treated with combined IV thrombolysis and endovascular therapy.