Long-term outcome of flexible onabotulinum toxin A treatment in facial dystonia.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the long-term outcome of onabotulinum used to treat facial dystonia and compare a flexible and fixed treatment regimen. METHODS: This was a retrospective comparative study looking at benign essential blepharospasm (BEB), hemifacial spasm (HFS) and aberrant facial nerve regeneration synkinesis (AFR) treatment with onabotulinum toxin A (Botox®) over a minimum of 10 years. Fifty-one patients were recruited into the study, with each dystonia subgroup having 17 patients. Blepharospasm disability score (BDS), subjective improvement score (SIS), duration of maximal effect (DME) and complications were recorded at each visit. RESULTS: The mean age was 63 years and gender predominately female. Thirty-seven patients underwent flexible treatment intervals compared to 14 fixed treatment intervals, averaging 3.4 and 4 per annum, respectively. Mean BDS significantly improved from 6 to 3 at last review across all 3 groups, with the highest effect on BEB. BDS improvement was greater in flexible intervals. SIS remained similar for all three conditions during follow-up, but in those undergoing flexible intervals, SIS increased by a small margin compared to fixed interval. Mean DME was 10.5 weeks across all dystonias, but increased progressively only in the flexible interval group. Complications included ptosis (30%), dry eye (14%) and lagophthalmos (8%). CONCLUSION: Flexible onabotulinum provided better long-term relief on BDS for facial dystonia than a fixed regimen. Flexible interval treatment may also provide better patient satisfaction and longer DME compared to fixed treatment. Both have similar complication rates. With flexible treatment however, fewer injections were required over 10 years, leading to cost saving.

Peripheral corneal relaxing incisions based on anterior keratometry from Scheimpflug tomography versus Placido topography during standard cataract surgery.

AIM: To compare the outcomes of peripheral corneal relaxing incisions (PCRIs) based on standardized nomogram using keratometry from Scheimpflug and Placido machines during standard cataract surgery and to assess the astigmatism neutralization potential of PCRIs. METHODS: In this prospective, comparative case series of eyes with keratometric astigmatism between 0.75D to 2.5D, undergoing routine cataract surgery, PCRIs were performed using standardized nomogram and keratometric data from either Scheimpflug or Placido machines. A single eye of 42 consecutive patients was recruited in each group. Data on pre- and postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected DVA (CDVA), keratometry and refraction were assessed at 10 weeks postoperatively. Refractive and keratometric J0 J45 vectors were also analyzed. RESULTS: Data on 41 and 39 eyes were available in each group, respectively. There was a significant reduction in keratometric astigmatism in both groups. However, between Scheimpflug and Placido groups, there was no difference in postoperative logMAR UDVA [0.15 ± 0.18 vs 0.14 ± 0.16, p = 0.82] and CDVA [0.11 ± 0.11 vs 0.09 ± 0.10, p = 0.58], postoperative spherical equivalent [-0.34D ± 0.40D vs -0.50D ± 0.43D, p = 0.11], keratometric J0 [-0.03 ± 0.39 vs 0.01 ± 0.85, p = 0.67] and J45 [-0.03 ± 0.41 vs 0.01 ± 0.86, p = 0.65] and refractive J0 [0.05 ± 0.46 vs -0.03 ± 0.92, p = 0.47)] and J45 [-0.06 ± 0.49 vs -0.03 ± 0.99, p = 0.82] vectors, reduction of keratometric astigmatism [-0.40D ± 0.55D vs -0.35D ± 1.24D, p = 0.75] and the keratometric astigmatism neutralization potential [38.56 % ± 29.71 % vs 52.66 % ± 44.06 %, p = 0.12]. - CONCLUSIONS: Although PCRIs performed using Scheimpflug or Placido keratometry reduced the keratometric astigmatism significantly during standard cataract surgery. The astigmatic neutralization potentials of PCRIs comparing these two groups were not significantly different and remain low during the early postoperative period.