Eye Donation: Awareness, Knowledge, Willingness, and Barriers among Paramedical and Allied Health Science Students at a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital in South India.

BACKGROUND: Visual impairments have physical, emotional, social, and economical consequences and are a crucial element influencing one's quality of life. A total of 1.285 million people are estimated to be visually impaired worldwide of which 39 million are categorised as blind. These figures are startling, given that 80 percent of known vision impairments are either treatable or preventable. Corneal transplants appear to be our best hope for resolving this problem; however, a global shortage of available donors continues to dampen efforts addressing this issue. METHODS: This two-year cross-sectional study employed a convenience sampling technique and a standardised questionnaire to survey 150 paramedical and allied health science students at a tertiary care teaching hospital and assessed the awareness, knowledge, willingness and barriers regarding eye donation. RESULTS: The study revealed a 93.3% awareness rate of the donation procedure, of which 46% attributed their awareness to media sources. However, other aspects assessed had much lower awareness rates; when the eyes are donated (53.3%), optimal time period for retrieval of tissue/organ (54%), ideal part transplanted (54%), age limit not restricting donation (67%), donation by donors using spectacles (48%), confidentiality of the donor and recipient (54%), hospital having the facility of an eye bank (63%). 49 percent of the respondents were willing to pledge themselves as eye donors, and a majority of the unwilling respondents reported that familial opposition was the reason for their hesitation. CONCLUSION: Knowledge levels appear to be below expectations, and more effort is required to ensure that knowledge is imparted to our healthcare practitioners, who will then transfer this knowledge to the population, resulting in an increase in donation rates.

Cross-linked hyaluronic acid viscoelastic scleral implant in trabeculectomy.

Purpose: Patients with glaucoma undergoing trabeculectomy develop bleb cicatrix causing poor postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) control and low success rates. Several approaches have been explored over the years for better outcomes. This study assesses the safety, efficacy, and outcome of trabeculectomy with HealaFlow® (Anteis S. A, Geneva, Switzerland), a high-molecular-weight cross-linked hyaluronic acid viscoelastic gel, and comparing it with the antimetabolite Mitomycin-C (MMC). Methods: A prospective, interventional, case-controlled study conducted at a tertiary care hospital in Southern India on 60 eyes of patients requiring trabeculectomy divided in two groups - HealaFlow scleral implant and adjuvant low-dose MMC (0.1 mg/mL). Postoperative IOP reduction along with bleb morphology was assessed over follow-up at 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months. Results: Preoperatively IOP in the two groups was statistically similar. Postoperative IOP on day 1 had statistically significant reduction in both groups with greater reduction in MMC group. However, by 12 months, the IOP reduction was statistically similar in both groups, i.e., 46.24% (to 11.04 ± 2.55 mmHg) and 54.47% (to 11.99 ± 3.37 mmHg) in HealaFlow® group and MMC group, respectively (P > 0.05). The bleb morphologies were similar and complications were seen equally, which resolved by 4 weeks. A complete success rate of 89.29% and a qualified success rate of 10.71% were observed equally in both groups. Conclusion: Absorbable biosynthetic cross-linked hyaluronic acid and low-dose MMC are equally safe and efficacious in trabeculectomy with significant IOP reduction and good bleb morphology. Therefore, it is a novel substitute for MMC.

Prospective randomized comparison of mitomycin C application in endoscopic and external dacryocystorhinostomy.

The aim of the study is to compare the subjective (relief of symptoms) and objective (endoscopic visualization of ostium patency at the time of syringing) outcomes at the end of two procedures-Endonasal DCR versus External DCR with Mitomycin C and to assess the role of Mitomycin C in maintaining patency of nasolacrimal drainage system. Prospective randomized comparative study was performed. Thirty-five patients were enrolled in each endoscopic and external dacryocystorhinostomy groups with Mitomycin C (MMC) application. The 37 eyes underwent endonasal DCR (28 unilateral primary eyes + 1 bilateral primary eyes + 5 unilateral revision eyes + 1 bilateral revision eye) while 35 eyes underwent external DCR (34 unilateral primary eyes + 1 unilateral revision eye). Mitomycin C 0.2 mg/ml was applied intra-operatively for 5 min to the ostium site at the end of endonasal or external DCR procedure. Objective assessment by syringing at the end of 1 year in the endonasal group showed 35 eyes (94%) were patent, 1 (3%) was partially blocked and 1(3%) was completely blocked; while in external group all 35 eyes (100%) were patent. Endoscopic visualization of the ostium at the time of syringing showed only one eye (3%) in the endonasal group was blocked while all the other eyes in both groups were patent. Both groups had a mean follow-up of 6-36 months. No complications were associated with use of Mitomycin C. In conclusion, intra-operative use of Mitomycin C in both endoscopic DCR and external DCR is safe and effective in increasing the success rate.