Orbital and Intracranial Emphysema Causing Orbital Compartment Syndrome: A Rare Case Report and Literature Review.

A case of 50-year-old male who presented with orbital compartment syndrome as a sequela of mid facial trauma, and literature review. Orbital compartment syndrome (OCS) is one of the potentially sight threatening emergencies encountered in clinical practice. Acute rise in pressure within the confined orbital cavity compromises the blood flow to retina and optic nerve leading to irreparable vision loss. Air entrapped in the orbital cavity leading to orbital compartment syndrome has been rarely reported. A brief literature search for the term orbital emphysema in PubMed yielded 352 articles out of which 280 articles were identified after screening for appropriate titles and case reports. A total of 138 patients were reported in the literature with severe orbital emphysema. Acute orbital compartment syndrome needs to be recognized and addressed on an emergency basis to achieve decompression so as to prevent an irreversible vison loss. Watchful eyes, an accurate diagnosis and timely surgical intervention could potentially reverse permanent damage to the optic nerve.

Accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation formulae in short eyes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

This review article attempts to evaluate the accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation formulae in short eyes. A thorough literature search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Scopus, and Web of Science databases was conducted for articles published over the past 21 years, up to July 2021. The mean absolute error was compared by using weighted mean difference, whereas odds ratio was used for comparing the percentage of eyes with prediction error within ±0.50 diopter (D) and ±1.0 D of target refraction. Statistical heterogeneity among studies was analyzed by using Chi-square test and I2 test. Fifteen studies including 2,395 eyes and 11 formulae (Barrett Universal II, Full Monte method, Haigis, Hill-RBF, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Holladay 2, Olsen, Super formula, SRK/T, and T2) were included. Although the mean absolute error (MAE) of Barrett Universal II was found to be the lowest, there was no statistically significant difference in any of the comparisons. The median absolute error (MedAE) of Barrett Universal II was the lowest (0.260). Holladay 1 and Hill-RBF had the highest percentage of eyes within ±0.50 D and ±1.0 D of target refraction, respectively. Yet their comparison with the rest of the formulae did not yield statistically significant results. Thus, to conclude, in the present meta-analysis, although lowest MAE and MedAE were found for Barrett Universal II and the highest percentage of eyes within ±0.50 D and ±1.0 D of target refraction was found for Holladay 1 and Hill-RBF, respectively, none of the formulae was found to be statistically superior over the other in eyes with short axial length.

Optimizing lens constants specifically for short eyes: Is it essential?

PURPOSE: Optimization of lens constants is a critically important step that improves refractive outcomes significantly. Whether lens constants optimized for the entire range of axial length would perform equally well in short eyes is still a matter of debate. The aim of this study was to analyze whether lens constants need to be optimized specifically for short eyes. METHODS: : This retrospective observational study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital in Central India. Eighty-six eyes of eighty-six patients were included. Optical biometry with IOLMaster 500 was done in all cases and lens constants were optimized using built-in software. Barrett Universal II, Haigis, Hill-RBF, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, and SRK/T formulae were compared using optimized constants. Mean absolute error, median absolute error (MedAE), and percentage of eyes within ±0.25, ±0.50, ±1.00, and ±2.00 diopter of the predicted refraction, of each formula were analyzed using manufacturer's, ULIB, and optimized lens constants. MedAE was compared across various constants used by Wilcoxon signed-rank test and among optimized constants by Friedman's test. Cochran's Q test compared the percentage of eyes within ± 0.25, ±0.50, ±1.00, and ± 2.00 diopter of the predicted refraction. A value of P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: : Optimized constant of Haigis had significantly lower MedAE (P < 0.00001) as compared to manufacturers. However, there was no statistically significant difference between ULIB and optimized constants. Postoptimization, there was no statistically significant difference among all formulae. CONCLUSION: : Optimizing lens constants specifically for short eyes gives no added advantage over those optimized for the entire range of axial length.

Efficacy of Nepafenac versus Flurbiprofen in Maintaining Intraoperative Mydriasis During Phacoemulsification: A Comparative Study.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of topical nepafenac (0.1%) with flurbiprofen (0.03%) in maintaining intra-operative mydriasis during phacoemulsification surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study comprised of 160 patients, who were divided into two arms of 80 each (arms A and B) after randomisation. Pre-operatively, all patients received one drop of tropicamide 0.8% and phenylephrine 5% (combination), 4 times, at an interval of 15 minutes on the day of surgery. Thereafter, Nepafenac drop in arm A/Flurbiprofen drop in arm B was administered 4 times, at an interval of 15 minutes keeping a gap of 10 minutes between tropicamide-phenylephrine and any of the experimental drugs. Phacoemulsification was performed one hour after the administration of last drop. Both vertical and horizontal pupillary diameter were measured at three steps; immediately before the surgical incision (baseline), at the end of emulsification of nucleus (before irrigation and aspiration) and at the end of surgery (after stromal hydration). RESULTS: The difference in pupillary diameter between two groups, was statistically insignificant for vertical diameter (P = 0.08) and horizontal diameter (P = 0.28) at the start of surgery. On the other hand, pupillary diameter difference was statistically significant after emulsification of nucleus and at the end of surgery as well when both vertical (P < 0.05) and horizontal diameter (P < 0.05) were considered. The total reduction in pupillary diameter (both vertically and horizontally) was significantly less in the Nepafenac as compared to Flurbiprofen group (P < 0.05). Analysis of mean cumulative dissipated energy did not document any appreciable difference between the two groups. Phacoemulsification time analysis yielded statistically significant results (P = 0.004) between the Nepafenac and Flurbiprofen group. CONCLUSION: In the present study, topical Nepafenac (0.1%) proved to be more efficacious in maintaining intra-operative mydriasis during phacoemulsification surgery as compared to topical Flurbiprofen (0.03%).