Thygeson's superficial punctate keratitis.

PURPOSE: Thygeson's superficial punctate keratitis (TSPK) is a chronic and recurrent corneal epitheliopathy. Although first described more than 70 years ago, the precise etiological mechanism and optimal treatment approach for TSPK has not been established. In this paper, we present an up-to date review of the literature and propose a step-by-step management protocol. METHOD: A literature search was done on PubMed using keywords including Thygeson's superficial punctate keratitis, punctate keratitis, etiology, management, and treatment. The literature was reviewed and reported. RESULTS: The main findings of this review include a summary of the main theories behind the cause TSPK; although topical corticosteroids remain the treatment of choice, long-term risks associated with these agents and recent studies have revealed immunomodulatory agents as promising treatment adjuvants or alternatives for TSPK; surgical interventions such as PRK/PTK have been utilized in selected refractory cases; finally we propose a treatment protocol based the best available evidence and clinical experience. CONCLUSION: Although the clinical features of TSPK have been well described, the specific cause of TSPK remains inconclusive. Mechanisms proposed including viral infection, immune-mediated, and immune responses to viral infection but require further investigation. More prospective randomized clinical trials comparing efficacy of corticosteroids, tacrolimus, and cyclosporine A (CSA) are required. More evidence is required for surgical interventions such as PRK/PTK.

Retrospective analysis of ophthalmology referrals during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to prepandemic.

OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to analyse emergency ophthalmology referrals to a Canadian tertiary academic centre during the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in comparison to prepandemic referrals. DESIGN: This was a retrospective chart review looking at emergency referrals seen by the ophthalmology service between March 18 to April 17, 2020 (representing the COVID-19 period), and March 18 to April 17, 2019 (representing the pre-COVID-19 period). METHODS: Data gathered from referral records included patient demographics, timing and site of referral, and ophthalmic diagnosis. Referrals were categorized as urgent or nonurgent, with urgent indicating the need for ophthalmic assessment within 24 hours. RESULTS: The total number of referrals decreased by 54.2% in the COVID-19 period versus the pre-COVID-19 period. There was a similar bimodal age distribution in both periods, with fewer patients over 65 years of age presenting during the pandemic. Tertiary hospital referrals decreased by 62% in the pandemic period, while nontertiary emergency department referral trends varied and outpatient clinic referrals increased by 16%. Overall, there was a significant shift in the distribution of referral sites (p = 0.04). The proportion of urgent referrals increased by 14% during the pandemic; this was not statistically significant. There was no significant change in the timing of referrals or in the distribution of diagnostic segments. CONCLUSIONS: This study offers insight into the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on ophthalmology referral patterns in a Canadian context. Moving forward, it helps to guide resource allocation and public education on the importance of seeking necessary eye care.

Retrospective analysis of ophthalmology consults to a tertiary academic teaching centre.

OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to analyse data from emergency ophthalmology referrals after-hours from different hospitals to identify the most common pathologies and compare accuracy of diagnoses. The primary objective was to identify common presenting entities and common causes of misdiagnosis in the emergency department to help guide education initiatives. DESIGN: This was a retrospective chart review that looked at consults occurring between September 1, 2015, and October 21, 2016. METHODS: Emergency ophthalmology consults were reviewed and the date, time, age, sex, and provisional diagnosis were recorded. Ophthalmic diagnosis was compared with provisional diagnosis to compare agreement rate. Diagnoses were categorized to determine most frequent etiologies presenting on an emergent basis. RESULTS: A total of 697 consults were reviewed. The most common consults by diagnostic category were anterior segment (36.4%) and posterior segment (27.4%) pathologies. Together, these categories accounted for over 60% of all consults. Agreement between provisional diagnosis and final ophthalmology diagnosis was 65.8%. CONCLUSIONS: There was a reasonable agreement rate between referring services diagnosis and ophthalmology diagnosis. The retrospective nature of this study and use of categories to determine agreement are potential biases and the agreement rate may not reflect clinical practice. Most common diagnoses were similar to previous studies. The authors noted several diagnostic categories that could be targeted as areas for medical education to help increase recognition in the primary care setting and facilitate appropriate ophthalmic referral.