Association between isotretinoin use and central retinal vein occlusion in an adolescent with minor predisposition for thrombotic incidents: a case report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>We report an adolescent boy with minimal pre-existing risk for thromboses who suffered central retinal vein occlusion associated with isotretinoin use for acne. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first well documented case of this association.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>An otherwise healthy 17-year-old white man who was treated with systemic isotretinoin for recalcitrant acne was referred with central retinal vein occlusion in one eye. Although a detailed investigation was negative, DNA testing revealed that the patient was a heterozygous carrier of the G20210A mutation of the prothrombin gene. Despite the fact that this particular mutation is thought to represent only a minor risk factor for thromboses, it is probable that isotretinoin treatment greatly increased the risk of a vaso-occlusive incident in this patient.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Isotretinoin use may be associated with sight- and life-threatening thrombotic adverse effects even in young patients with otherwise minimal thrombophilic risk. Physicians should be aware of such potential dangers.</p

Postoperative IOP prophylaxis practice following uncomplicated cataract surgery: a UK-wide consultant survey

BACKGROUND: In order to minimise postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) rise, after routine uncomplicated cataract surgery, prophylaxis may be adopted. Currently, there are no specific guidelines in this regard resulting in wide variation in practice across the UK. We sought to document these variations through a questionnaire survey. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to all consultant ophthalmic surgeons in the UK. RESULTS: 62.6% of surgeons did not use any IOP lowering agents. 37.4% surgeons routinely prescribed some form of medication. The majority (86.8%) used oral diamox. 20.6% of surgeons said they based their practice on evidence, 43.3% on personal experience, and 17.6% on unit policy. Surprisingly, among the two groups of surgeons (those who gave routine prophylaxis, and those who did not) the percentages of surgeons quoting personal experience, unit policy, or presence of evidence was strikingly similar. The timing of the first postoperative IOP check varied from the same day to beyond 2 weeks. Only 20.2% of surgeons had ever seen an adverse event related to IOP rise; this complication is thus very rare. CONCLUSION: This survey highlights a wide variation in the practice and postoperative management of phacoemulsification cataract surgery. What is very striking is that there is a similar proportion of surgeons in the diametrically opposite groups (those who give or do not give routine IOP lowering prophylaxis) who believe that there practice is evidence based. The merits of this study suggests that consideration must be given to drafting a uniform guideline in this area of practice