Clinical features, diagnosis, treatment, and course of ocular sarcoidosis with or without uveitis: A retrospective, comparative study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare characteristics, diagnosis, treatment, visual prognosis, and course between ocular sarcoidosis with or without uveitis in a population in Southern France. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from patients with ocular sarcoidosis in a tertiary eye care center in Nice from January 2003 to December 2021. The inclusion criterion was biopsy-proven ocular sarcoidosis according to IWOS criteria as the first clinical manifestation of sarcoidosis. RESULTS: A total of 25 patients were included. Twenty patients had uveitis (70% panuveitis, 20% intermediate uveitis, and 10% anterior uveitis) and five patients had non-uveitic ocular sarcoidosis (one patient with dacryoadenitis, one patient with orbital granuloma, two patients with palpebral granuloma, and one patient with episcleritis). Only the cases with uveitis had bilateral involvement (85% of cases). There was no significant difference in ethnicity, biopsy diagnosis, systemic manifestations, or treatment between the two groups. Final visual outcomes remained good for both groups, with 96% of patients with BCVA>20/50, with no significant difference. Patients with non-uveitic sarcoidosis experienced less recurrence on treatment (P=0.042) and more remission (P=0.038) than patients with uveitis. Eighty percent of patients with uveitis had at least three suggestive clinical intraocular signs meeting IWOS criteria. CONCLUSION: In this population in Southern France, uveitis was the most common presentation of ocular sarcoidosis. The type of ocular sarcoidosis does not appear to be correlated with the type of systemic manifestations, use of systemic therapy, or visual prognosis, but patients with non-uveitic ocular sarcoidosis appear to have a better course with fewer recurrences on treatment and more remission than patients with uveitic ocular sarcoidosis.

[Contribution of technological aids to the extraction of orbital foreign bodies]. / Apport des aides technologiques dans l'extraction des corps étrangers orbitaires.

BACKGROUND: Removal of orbital foreign bodies is a surgical challenge. The purpose of this study is to report our experience in the removal of orbital foreign bodies and to evaluate the usefulness of various technological aids in their removal. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective study at Nice University Hospital (France) from January 2017 to December 2023. All patients undergoing surgery for an orbital foreign body during the study period were included. Data recorded included the nature of the orbital foreign body, its size, location, surgical route, outcome (success, partial success, failure), and technological aids used (intraoperative navigation, intraoperative imaging scope, orbital magnet). Concurrently, we designed a dedicated orbital magnet, which was tested in the anatomy laboratory and in two of our patients. RESULTS: Six patients, all young men, were included during the study period. Removal was successful, partially successful, or unsuccessful in one-third of cases, respectively. Failure was associated with orbital foreign bodies located in the intraconal or posterior orbital space. Preoperatively, the use of a "low-artifact" scanner allowed us to better determine the exact size and shape of the orbital foreign body. Intraoperative navigation was not accurate enough, due to the mobility of the orbital bodies within the orbital fat. In our experience, intraoperative scope imaging was more accurate. The use of a dedicated orbital magnet was successfully tested in the anatomy laboratory and allowed the removal of a small orbital foreign body in one of our patients. Intraoperative surgical videos are provided. CONCLUSION: Vegetal orbital foreign bodies must be systematically removed. Removal of non-vegetal orbital foreign bodies should be considered on a case-by-case basis based on their size, best assessed using a "low artifact" scanner, their location, and their intrinsic ferromagnetism. Intraoperative navigation does not appear useful, while intraoperative scope imaging does. A dedicated orbital magnet might be helpful in removing ferromagnetic orbital foreign bodies. However, an orbital magnet may be ineffective in removing intraorbital bullets, since they are made primarily of an alloy of copper and lead.

[Blue light and intraocular lenses (IOLs): Beliefs and realities]. / Lumière bleue et implants intraoculaires : croyances et réalités.

The first intraocular lenses (IOLs) used for cataract surgery transmitted both ultraviolet (UV) radiation and visible light to the retina. Colorless UV-blocking IOLs were introduced and rapidly adopted in the 1980s. Yellow-tinted blue-blocking (also known as blue-filtering) IOLs were marketed in the early 1990s. Blue-blocking IOLs were intended to simulate age-related crystalline lens yellowing to reduce the cyanopsia that some patients experienced after cataract surgery. When blue-filtering IOLs were introduced in North America, however, blue-blocking chromophores were advocated as a way to protect patients from age-related macular degeneration (AMD) despite the lack of evidence that normal environmental light exposure causes AMD. The "blue light hazard" is a term that describes the experimental finding that acute, abnormally intense light exposures are potentially more phototoxic to the retina when short rather than long wavelengths are used. Thus, in brief exposures to intense light sources such as welding arcs, ultraviolet radiation is more hazardous than blue light, which is more hazardous than longer wavelength green or red light. International commissions have cautioned that the blue light hazard does not apply to normal indoor or outdoor light exposures. Nonetheless, the hazard is used for commercial purposes to suggest misleadingly that ambient environmental light can cause acute retinal phototoxicity and increase the risk of AMD. Very large epidemiological studies show that blue-blocking IOLs do not reduce the risk or progression of AMD. Additionally, blue-filtering IOLs or spectacles cannot decrease glare disability, because they decrease image and glare illuminance in the same proportion. Blue light is essential for older adults' scotopic photoreception needed to reduce the risk of nighttime falling and related injuries. It is also critical for circadian photoreception that is essential for good health, sleep and cognitive performance. Unfortunately, age-related pupillary miosis, retinal rod and ganglion cell photoreceptor degeneration and decreased outdoor activity all reduce the amount of healthful blue light available to older adults. Blue-restricting IOLs further reduce the available blue light at a time when older adults need it most. Patients and ophthalmologists are exposed to hypothesis-based advertisements for blue-filtering optical devices that suppress short wavelength light critical for vision in dim lighting and for good physical and mental health. Spectacle and intraocular lens selections should be based on scientific fact, not conjecture. Ideal IOLs should improve photoreception rather than limit it permanently. Practice efficiency, surgical convenience and physician-manufacturer relationships may eliminate a patient's opportunity to choose between colorless blue-transmitting IOLs and yellow-tinted, blue-restricting IOLs. Cataract surgeons ultimately determine whether their patients have the opportunity to make an informed choice about their future photoreception.

Can 18F-FDG PET/CT findings be used to predict orbital tumor histology?

PURPOSE: To investigate whether 18F-FDG PET/CT might be useful to predict the histology of various orbital tumors based on the maximum standard uptake value (SUVmax) and the OMSUV (orbital max SUV)/MLSUV (mean liver SUV) ratio. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective single-center study was conducted between May 2019 and December 2020. Patients with an orbital mass who underwent preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT followed by an orbital biopsy were included. Tumor histology was classified as follows: orbital inflammation, solid tumor, low-grade lymphoid tumor, and high-grade lymphoid tumor. Orbital tumors were also classified as indolent or aggressive. Data recorded included the orbital SUVmax, OMSUV/MLSUV ratio and additional extra-orbital SUV sites. RESULTS: Forty-five patients (24 men) were included. There were 15 (33.3%), 14 (31.1%), 9 (20%), and 7 (15.5%) cases of orbital inflammation, solid tumor, low-grade lymphoid tumor, and high-grade lymphoid tumor, respectively. No correlation was found between the OMSUV/MLSUV ratio and orbital SUVmax and tumor histology (Z = -0.77, Z = -0.6, Z = -1.6, and Z = 0.94, all P > 0.05, respectively). No correlation was found between the OMSUV/MLSUV ratio (Z = -1.42, P > 0.05) and orbital SUVmax (Z = -0.82, P > 0.05) and tumor aggressiveness (indolent versus aggressive). Subgroup analyses showed that SUVmax was predictive of lymphoma aggressiveness (P = 0.05) and was able to distinguish orbital cancers (all lymphomas+solid tumors) from benign tumors (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: 18F-FDG PET/CT could not be used to predict the underlying orbital tumor histology. However, more aggressive tumors, especially high-grade lymphomas and cancers, tended to have a higher orbital SUVmax compared to indolent lesions.

Intraoperative iStent versus postoperative selective laser trabeculoplasty in early glaucoma patients undergoing cataract surgery: A retrospective comparative study.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of iStent inject® versus 360° selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) in patients with early glaucoma undergoing cataract surgery. METHODS: A retrospective non-randomized study was conducted in 73 eyes divided into two groups: cataract surgery+intraoperative iStent (n=40) versus cataract surgery+postoperative SLT at one month (n=33). The primary endpoint was intraocular pressure (IOP) lowering≥20% between baseline and 6 months postoperatively. The secondary endpoints were IOP lowering at 1, 6 and 12 months, and the mean number of IOP-lowering medications at 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: The mean baseline IOP was 19.1 mmHg with no significant difference between groups. The mean baseline number of IOP-lowering medications was higher in the iStent group (n=1.95) compared to the SLT group (n=1.53; P=0.04). At 6 months, 18 (60%) patients in the SLT group and 20 (51%) patients in the iStent group achieved IOP lowering≥20% with no significant difference between groups (P=0.431). At 6 months, no difference in the mean number of IOP-lowering medications was found between groups (-0.92 and -0.89 in the iStent and SLT groups, respectively). Similar results were found at 12 months. CONCLUSION: These results suggest similar safety and efficacy of intraoperative iStent and postoperative 360° SLT in lowering IOP and reducing glaucoma eye drops in early glaucoma patients undergoing cataract surgery. Treatment choice should be based on the ophthalmologist's experience and on the cost-benefit ratio.

[Intraocular pressure elevation and intravitreal steroid implant injection: State of the art in 2023. Recommendations of the French Glaucoma Society and French Ophthalmology Society [French version]]. / Hypertonie oculaire et injection intravitréenne d'implant de corticoïde, état de l'art en 2023. Recommandations françaises SFG/SFO [version française].

These are the recommendations of French glaucoma and retina experts on the management of ocular hypertension (OHT) observed in 1/3 of cases after intravitreal steroid implant injections. They are an update to the recommendations first published in 2017. There are two implants on the French market: the dexamethasone (DEXi) and fluocinolone acetonide (FAci) implants. It is important to know the pressure status before injecting a patient with a steroid implant. Monitoring of the IOP adapted to the specific drug is necessary throughout follow-up and reinjections. Real-life studies have made it possible to optimize the management algorithm by significantly increasing the safety of use of these implants. A corticosteroid test with DEXi is necessary before switching to FAci to optimize the pressure tolerance of the latter. In addition to topical glaucoma medications, SLT laser can be considered in the therapeutic arsenal for the management of steroid-induced OHT and future injections.

Ocular hypertension and intravitreal steroids injections, update in 2023. French guidelines of the French glaucoma society and the French ophthalmology society.

These guidelines are a consensus of French glaucoma and retina experts on the management of ocular hypertension (OHT) observed in a third of the cases after corticosteroid implant intravitreal injections. They update the first guidelines published in 2017. Two implants are marketed in France: the dexamethasone implant (DEXi) and the fluocinolone acetonide implant (FAci). It is essential to assess the pressure status before injecting a patient with a corticosteroid implant. A molecule-specific monitoring of the intraocular pressure is needed throughout the follow-up and at the time of reinjections. Real-life studies have allowed optimizing the management algorithm by significantly increasing the safety of these implants. Corticosteroid testing with DEXi should be performed before switching to FAci to optimize pressure tolerance of FAci. Beyond topical hypotensive treatments, selective laser trabeculoplasty may be considered in the therapeutic arsenal for the management of steroid-induced OHT and subsequent injections.

Optic nerve sheath fenestration: Current status in France and comparison of 6 different surgical approaches.

PURPOSE: Optic nerve sheath fenestration (ONSF) is a surgical procedure commonly performed in the Anglo-Saxon countries for the treatment of medically refractory idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH). We chose to compare 6 different trans-orbital surgical approaches to ONSF. We also desired to determine the number of optic nerve decompression procedures performed in France in 2019 and 2020. METHODS: Four fresh frozen orbits were dissected at the University of Nice anatomy laboratory. We performed the following surgical approaches: (i) eyelid crease, (ii) lid-split, (iii) medial transconjunctival with medial rectus disinsertion, (iv) medial transconjunctival without rectus disinsertion, (v) lateral transconjunctival and (vi) lateral orbitotomy. For each surgical approach, we measured the distance between the incision and the optic nerve dura mater. We also extracted data from the French National PMSI (Programme de Médicalisation des Systèmes d' Information) database from January 2019 through December 2020 to determine the annual number of optic nerve decompression procedures. RESULTS: The lid crease and medial transconjunctival approaches provided the shortest distance to the optic nerve (average 21mm and 24mm, respectively) and the lowest levels of difficulty compared to the other surgical routes. A total of 23 and 45 optic nerve decompressions were performed in France in 2019 and 2020, respectively. Among them, only 2 and 7 procedures, respectively, were performed through a trans-orbital approach. CONCLUSION: Upper lid crease incision and medial transconjunctival approaches are the most direct and easiest surgical routes when performing an ONSF. We found that ONSF was rarely performed in France. We strongly recommend close cooperation between ophthalmologists, neurologists, neurosurgeons and interventional radiologists.

Filler-induced blindness "seen" by ophthalmologists: Case presentation and treatment algorithm.

PURPOSE: Filler-induced blindness (FIB) is the most threatening complication following periocular injection. To date, no standard of care has been established. The goal of this study is to report a new case of FIB with partial visual recovery and present our personalized algorithm for treatment based on fluorescein angiography findings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Case report with 24 months follow-up and treatment algorithm. RESULTS: Our patient experienced complete vision loss to no light perception following forehead lipofilling. Retinal angiography identified a posterior ciliary artery occlusion. Antiplatelet medication, steroids and intraocular pressure lowering medications were administrated, followed by hyperbaric oxygen treatment (HBOT). Visual acuity improved to +0.8 logMar. The HBOT treatment was monitored by fluorescein angiogram. Based on this case and on the ophthalmic literature on retinal and ciliary artery occlusion, we established a personalized FIB protocol guided by fluorescein angiography. CONCLUSION: Although prevention remains the best treatment, all physicians should be prepared to manage FIB. Prompt management at the office guided by written protocols, as well as emergency kits, are essential. In referral centers, personalized treatment should be undertaken based on fluorescein angiography findings.

[Treatment of exudative age-related macular degeneration: Consensus of French experts for first-line treatment selection and the importance of long-term risk/benefit ratio]. / Consensus d'experts français sur les critères de choix d'un traitement de 1re intention dans la DMLA néovasculaire et importance du ratio bénéfice/risque à long terme.

Choosing a first-line treatment to optimize long-term outcomes is a major challenge for treating patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD). The development of several new molecules makes it critical to identify the relevant factors to consider so as to provide an optimal risk-benefit ratio when initiating a treatment in naïve patients with neovascular AMD. This paper proposes a consensus established with the Delphi method (which includes a gradation in a consensus based on an analysis of the convergence rate of answers) to provide criteria that guide the ophthalmologist's decision for treatment initiation and follow-up in neovascular AMD patients. Fourteen questions were submitted to 93 French retina experts. Thirteen (93%) of the questions reached a consensus (≥50% of answers consensual). The criteria recommended to take into account were both efficacy and onset of action of the molecules, their safety, and the ability to decrease injection frequency. The primary criterion of expected efficacy of a molecule is a combination of the gain in visual acuity and resorption of retinal fluid. With regard to safety, experts recommend tighter follow-up for molecules currently in development, and at every scheduled visit, patients should be screened to identify early any potential adverse effects such as intraocular inflammation, retinal vasculitis or vascular occlusion. Experts also emphasize the importance of the packaging of the biological, with a preference toward prefilled syringes. Injection frequency is a key factor, and the authors recommended aiming for a maximal injection interval of 12 to 16 weeks. The stability of that maximum interval is also an important factor to consider in treatment selection.

Eye amputation following lifitegrast treatment for ocular graft-versus-host disease: First case report.

Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a common complication in patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation for acute myeloblastic leukemia that could be very difficult to treat. Lifitegrast 5% (Xiidra@, Novartis), a new immunosuppressive eye drop, was recently approved by the FDA for the treatment of severe dry eye and is currently under review by the European Medicines Agency. In France, lifitegrast has been approved by the French authorities for temporary use in refractory dry eye syndrome resistant to tear substitutes and topical cyclosporine. To date, serious complications have been reported only exceptionally. In this article, we report the case of a 65-year-old patient with a medical history of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) diagnosed in 2015 who received a first matched related donor transplant. In 2019, this patient developed chronic GVH involving the skin, oral mucosa and eye. Despite taking topical and systemic medications for 3 months, the patient did not report relief of ocular symptoms. Therefore, lifitegrast was prescribed. To our knowledge, we report the first case of corneal perforation in which evisceration was required following treatment with topical lifitegrast for chronic GVH. In the case presented here, it can be assumed that the underlying mechanisms leading to corneal perforation are multifactorial. Using drug accountability criteria, lifitegrast appears to be strongly associated with the development of bacterial keratitis and corneal perforation.

Efficacy and safety of an artificial dermal graft for the reconstruction of exenterated sockets: a preliminary report.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to report our experience with the use of artificial dermis grafts for orbital socket reconstruction following orbital exenteration (OE). METHOD: A retrospective study was conducted in our ocular oncology centre from May 2018 to June 2020 in patients undergoing OE for orbital malignancies in whom an artificial dermis device (Integra® template, 2 layers) was used for reconstruction. Data recorded included demographics, previous and adjuvant treatments, aetiologies, surgical procedure, surgical reconstruction, complications and follow-up. The main outcome measure was the time between OE and the full granulation of the cavity. RESULTS: Ten patients (mean age, 71.3 years [43-92]) were included. Tumours originated from the conjunctiva (n = 5, 50%), eyelid (n = 3, 30%) and orbit (n = 2, 20%). Nine patients underwent total OE, and one required enlarged OE. Orbital reconstruction was performed using an artificial dermis alone (n = 9, 90%) or combined with regional flaps (n = 1, 10%). The mean granulation time was 3.3 weeks (2-4). Three (30%) patients received adjuvant radiotherapy 1 month post-surgery. The mean time to spontaneous epithelialization was 9.4 weeks (6-12). Preoperative and postoperative radiotherapy was not associated with a delayed epithelialization of the socket (p = 0.463 and p = 0.236, respectively). One (10%) and 2 (20%) patients experienced postoperative socket infection and an ethmoidal fistula, respectively. The mean follow-up was 11.6 months (6-16). CONCLUSION: Using artificial dermis grafts alone or with regional flaps appears to be a viable surgical procedure for orbital socket reconstruction. They reduce surgical morbidity and hospital stay. Preoperative and postoperative radiotherapy does not seem to delay socket healing.