Impact of vaccination on keratoplasty.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Corneal graft rejection has been reported after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the literature regarding corneal graft rejection after vaccination, including rejection rates and risk factors. We aim to create a framework to identify patients who are at higher risk for graft rejection and may warrant consideration of prophylactic interventions. RECENT FINDINGS: Graft rejection has been reported following administration of mRNA, viral vector, and inactivated whole-virion COVID-19 vaccines. Most cases had additional risk factors associated with rejection. Vaccination increases circulation of proinflammatory cytokines, CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell responses, and antispike neutralizing antibody, all of which may contribute to graft rejection. Two prospective studies have found no relationship between recent vaccination and rejection but 20% of cornea specialists report to have seen a vaccine-associated rejection and 22% recommend delaying vaccination in certain circumstances. Many specialists recommend prophylactic topical corticosteroids before and after vaccination to mitigate rejection risk but there is no evidence to support this practice on a wider scale. SUMMARY: Our framework identified 96.8% of penetrating keratoplasty patients with vaccine-associated rejection as higher risk. Further research is needed in order to develop evidence-based guidelines.

Bilateral exudative retinal detachments and associated choroidal detachments in a patient on dapsone: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Dapsone is a synthetic sulfonamide used to treat numerous dermatologic conditions. Ocular side effects have been rarely reported and include retinal necrosis, optic atrophy, and macular infarction. We report the first known case of bilateral choroidal effusions and exudative retinal detachments associated with dapsone use. CASE PRESENTATION: A 57-year-old male with a past medical history of testicular seminoma presented with bilateral blurry vision for 2 months. His exam revealed bilateral choroidal effusions with bilateral exudative retinal detachments without evidence of intraocular tumor. The patient had recently been prescribed dapsone for urticarial vasculitis. The patient was instructed to discontinue dapsone and follow-up closely. Interval follow-up of 8 months demonstrated almost complete resolution of the choroidal effusions and retinal detachments with residual pigment epithelium changes after cessation of dapsone. The patient recovered his pre-detachment visual function. CONCLUSIONS: Patients on dapsone who present with new visual complaints should undergo a thorough ophthalmic evaluation given the multiple mechanisms by which dapsone can affect the eye.

A case of ciliary body cyst with extrascleral extension.

We report the case of a 3-year-old girl who presented with an elevated, darkly colored, subconjunctival lesion found to be a ciliary body cyst with extrascleral extension. The patient was treated with excision of bulbar conjunctiva, sclera, and the ciliary body cystic lesion. The defect was repaired with a scleral patch graft. The patient had a small recurrent cyst after 15 months of postsurgical follow-up, and the procedure was repeated. There was no recurrence at follow-up 1 year after the second surgery.

Urinary MyProstateScore (MPS) to Rule out Clinically-Significant Cancer in Men with Equivocal (PI-RADS 3) Multiparametric MRI: Addressing an Unmet Clinical Need.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the complementary value of urinary MyProstateScore (MPS) testing and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and assess outcomes in patients with equivocal mpMRI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Included patients underwent mpMRI followed by urine collection and prostate biopsy at the University of Michigan between 2015 -2019. MPS values were calculated from urine specimens using the validated model based on serum PSA, urinary PCA3, and urinary TMPRSS2:ERG. In the PI-RADS 3 population, the discriminative accuracy of PSA, PSAD, and MPS for GG≥2 cancer was quantified by the AUC curve. Decision curve analysis was used to assess net benefit of MPS relative to PSAD. RESULTS: There were 540 patients that underwent mpMRI and biopsy with MPS available. The prevalence of GG≥2 cancer was 13% for PI-RADS 3, 56% for PI-RADS 4, and 87% for PI-RADS 5. MPS was significantly higher in men with GG≥2 cancer [median 44.9, IQR (29.4 -57.5)] than those with negative or GG1 biopsy [median 29.2, IQR (14.8 -44.2); P <.001] in the overall population and when stratified by PI-RADS score. In the PI-RADS 3 population (n = 121), the AUC for predicting GG≥2 cancer was 0.55 for PSA, 0.62 for PSAD, and 0.73 for MPS. MPS provided the highest net clinical benefit across all pertinent threshold probabilities. CONCLUSION: In patients that underwent mpMRI and biopsy, MPS was significantly associated with GG≥2 cancer across all PI-RADS scores. In the PI-RADS 3 population, MPS significantly outperformed PSAD in ruling out GG≥2 cancer. These findings suggest a complementary role of MPS testing in patients that have undergone mpMRI.

Imputing HbA1c from capillary blood glucose levels in patients with type 2 diabetes in Sri Lanka: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a population-specific methodology for estimating glycaemic control that optimises resource allocation for patients with diabetes in rural Sri Lanka. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Trincomalee, Sri Lanka. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (n=220) from three hospitals in Trincomalee, Sri Lanka. OUTCOME MEASURE: Cross-validation was used to build and validate linear regression models to identify predictors of haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). Validation of models that regress HbA1c on known determinants of glycaemic control was thus the major outcome. These models were then used to devise an algorithm for categorising the patients based on estimated levels of glycaemic control. RESULTS: Time since last oral intake other than water and capillary blood glucose were the statistically significant predictors of HbA1c and thus included in the final models. In order to minimise type II error (misclassifying a high-risk individual as low-risk or moderate-risk), an algorithm for interpreting estimated glycaemic control was created. With this algorithm, 97.2% of the diabetic patients with HbA1c ≥9.0% were correctly identified. CONCLUSIONS: Our calibrated algorithm represents a highly sensitive approach for detecting patients with high-risk diabetes while optimising the allocation of HbA1c testing. Implementation of these methods will optimise the usage of resources devoted to the management of diabetes in Trincomalee, Sri Lanka. Further external validation with diverse patient populations is required before applying our algorithm more widely.