Aortic valve replacement with biological prosthesis in patients aged 50-69 years.

OBJECTIVES: There is no consensus regarding the use of biological or mechanical prostheses in patients 50-69 years of age. Previous studies have reported a survival advantage with mechanical valves. Our goal was to compare the long-term survival of patients in the intermediate age groups of 50-59 and 60-69 years receiving mechanical or biological aortic valve prostheses. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients in the age groups 50-59 years (n = 329) and 60-69 years (n = 648) who had a first-time isolated aortic valve replacement between 2000 and 2019. Kaplan-Meier and competing risk analyses were performed to compare survival, incidence of aortic valve reoperation, haemorrhagic complications and thromboembolic events for mechanical versus biological prostheses. RESULTS: Patients aged 50-59 years with a biological prosthesis had a higher probability of aortic valve reintervention (26.3%, biological vs 2.6% mechanical; P < 0.001 at 15 years). The incidence of haemorrhagic complications or thromboembolic events was similar in the 2 groups. Patients aged 60-69 years with a mechanical prosthesis had a higher risk of haemorrhagic complications (6.9%, biological vs 16.2%, mechanical; P = 0.001 at 15 years). Biological prostheses had a higher overall probability of reintervention for valve dysfunction (20.9%, biological vs 4.8%, mechanical; P = 0.024). In both age groups, there was no difference in long-term survival between patients receiving a biological or a mechanical prosthesis. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in long-term survival between mechanical and biological prostheses for both age groups. Mechanical prostheses had a higher risk of bleeding in the 60-69-year group whereas biological valves had higher overall reintervention probability without an impact on long-term survival. It may be safe to use biological valves based on lifestyle choices for patients in the 50-69-year age group.

Clinical correlates of common corneal neovascular diseases: a literature review.

A large subset of corneal pathologies involves the formation of new blood and lymph vessels (neovascularization), leading to compromised visual acuity. This article aims to review the clinical causes and presentations of corneal neovascularization (CNV) by examining the mechanisms behind common CNV-related corneal pathologies, with a particular focus on herpes simplex stromal keratitis, contact lenses-induced keratitis and CNV secondary to keratoplasty. Moreover, we reviewed CNV in the context of different types of corneal transplantation and keratoprosthesis, and summarized the most relevant treatments available so far.

Development of an Arabic version of the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire as a tool to study eye diseases patients in Egypt.

AIM: To develop and test an Arabic version of the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25 (NEI-VFQ-25). METHODS: NEI-VFQ-25 was translated into Arabic according to WHO translation guidelines. We enrolled adult consenting patients with bilateral chronic eye diseases who presented to 14 hospitals across Egypt from October to December 2012, and documented their clinical findings. Psychometric properties were then tested using STATA. RESULTS: We recruited 379 patients, whose mean age was (54.5±15)y. Of 46.2% were males, 227 had cataract, 31 had glaucoma, 23 had retinal detachment, 37 had diabetic retinopathy, and 61 had miscellaneous visual defects. Non-response rate and the floor and ceiling numbers of the Arabic version (ARB-VFQ-25) were calculated. Internal consistency was high in all subscales (except general health), with Cronbach-α ranging from 0.702-0.911. Test-retest reliability was high (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.79). CONCLUSION: ARB-VFQ-25 is a reliable and valid tool for assessing visual functions of Arabic speaking patients. However, some questions had high non-response rates and should be substituted by available alternatives. Our results support the importance of including self-reported visual functions as part of routine ophthalmologic examination.