Experiences of two different modalities in the management of choroidal melanoma in the Asian Indian population

Background: Choroidal malignant melanoma is a rare intraocular cancer in Asian Indian population. There is a paucity of data from our population comparing iodine 125 (I-125) brachytherapy and enucleation. Aim: This study aims to compare two groups of choroidal melanoma patients treated with either I-125 brachytherapy or enucleation in the Asian Indian population. Objectives: To evaluate the long-term morbidity and mortality rates in choroidal melanoma patients treated with either I-125 brachytherapy or enucleation. Methods: It is a retrospective study involving forty four eyes, diagnosed with choroidal melanoma from May 2008 to February 2015. All were evaluated preoperatively for metastasis. Twenty-two underwent globe salvaging I-125 brachytherapy surgery whereas remaining 22 underwent globe destructive primary enucleation procedure. Results: At a mean follow-up 39 months, 2 of 22 cases (9%) died in the brachytherapy group. One was secondary to metastasis in the liver while the other case died of a natural cause. In the enucleation group also, there were two deaths (9%) secondary to metastasis. The metastasis free survival was 95% in the brachytherapy group and 91% in the enucleation group, which was not statistically significant (P = 0.3577). Kaplan–Meier survival at 3 years and 5 years was 95% and 89% for brachytherapy group and 94% and 89% for enucleation group. Conclusion: This study found no difference in the long-term survival of choroidal melanoma patients treated with either brachytherapy or enucleation in the Asian Indian eyes

Pigmented ciliary body medulloepithelioma in a newborn infant

Ciliary body medulloepithelioma is a nonpigmented tumor which presents during the first decade of life. It is rarely seen in newborn infants. We report a pigmented medulloepithelioma in a newborn infant, which showed a rapid growth. Ciliary body medulloepithelioma should be considered in the differential diagnosis in a newborn infant presenting with leukocoria

Global Current Practice Patterns for the Management of Open Globe Injuries

To determine global current practice patterns for the management of open globe injuries and identify areas of variation. Cross-sectional survey. An online survey assessed global management paradigms for open globe injuries from August 2020 to January 2021. Responses were collected from experts at eye trauma centers and emergency departments worldwide who manage ≥1 open globe injury per month. The survey assessed the use/selection of antibiotics and steroids, procedural and imaging decisions, and admission practices for open globe injuries. Responses were received from representatives of 36 of 42 institutions (85.7%), of which 33 (78.6%) had sufficient trauma volume to be included. Included responses were distributed across North America (n=12, 36.4%), Asia (n=12, 36.4%), South America (n=4, 12.1%), Africa (n=3, 9.1%), Europe (n=1, 3.0%), and Australia (n=1, 3.0%). Preoperative systemic antibiotics for open globe injuries were administered by 75.8% (n = 25/33) of institutions, while 30.3% (n = 10/33) administered preoperative topical antibiotics. Intraoperative ophthalmic antibiotics for open globe injuries were used by 54.5% (n = 18/33) of experts. Most institutions also administered postoperative systemic antibiotics (n = 23 [69.7%]) and topical steroids (n = 29 [87.9%]), although specific medication choices diverged. At 19 responding centers (61.3% of the 31 that had trainees), residents participated in surgical repairs. Many institutions discharged patients after repair, but 54.5% (n = 18/33) of locations routinely admitted them for observation. Preferred management practices for open globe injuries vary widely. To ensure the highest standard of care for all patients, evidence-based international guidelines for the treatment of these injuries are needed

Global Preferred Practice Patterns for the Management of Exogenous Endophthalmitis: A Survey by the American Society of Ophthalmic Trauma.

OBJECTIVE : To investigate the global practice patterns for the management of exogenous endophthalmitis. METHODS : This cross-sectional study was conducted to assess global practice patterns for the management of exogenous endophthalmitis. An online survey comprised of questions regarding the management of exogenous endophthalmitis was distributed to institutions who are members of International Globe and Adnexal Trauma Epidemiology Study Group (IGATES) or invited affiliates of the American Society of Ophthalmic Trauma and the Asia Pacific Ophthalmic Trauma Society. Responses were gathered from August 2020 to January 2021. RESULTS Of 42 institutions, 36 responses were received (86% response rate), of which 33 (79%) were included in the analysis. Included centers were from Asia (36%), North America (36%), South America (12%), Africa (9%), Europe (3%), and Australia (3%). Oral antibiotics were administered in 19 (58%) institutions, with moxifloxacin as the preferred agent (n=9, 27%). The preferred method for obtaining cultures was vitreous tap (n=25, 76%). Most institutions (n=26, 79%) routinely administered intravitreal vancomycin and ceftazidime, while intravitreal steroids were routinely administered at 11 centers (33%). Indications for performing vitrectomy included; decreased visual acuity (n=14, 39%); all cases of exogenous endophthalmitis (n=4, 12%); non-response to medical therapy (n=4, 12%); or no view of the fundus (n=4, 12%), indicating significant variation in surgical indications. More than half (n=17, 52%) of responding institutions routinely admitted patients with exogenous endophthalmitis to the hospital. Institutions in the United States were less likely to administer oral antibiotics (27% vs. 73%, P = 0.024) and to admit patients (9% vs. 73%, P < 0.001) compared to other countries. CONCLUSIONS : This study highlights the global variations in the management of exogenous endophthalmitis, especially as it pertains to surgical indications. Further establishment of evidence-based guidelines may be beneficial to provide more uniform guidance to optimize outcomes

Global Current Practice Patterns for the Management of Central Retinal Artery Occlusion.

Global practice paradigms for central retinal artery occlusion (CRAO) were summarized. Responses were collected from specialists via survey. Management patterns for CRAO rely on physician and center-level preferences given the lack of evidence-based international guidelines

Global Current Practice Patterns for the Management of Hyphema

Purpose: Hyphema is a sequela of ocular trauma and can be associated with significant morbidity. Management of this condition is variable and can depend on individual institutional guidelines. We aimed to summarize current practices in hyphema management across ophthalmological institutions worldwide. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted across North America, Asia, South America, Africa, Europe, and Australia from August 2020 to January 2021. The survey assessed the existing practices in the management of hyphema at each institution. Results: For layered hyphema, topical steroids were routinely administered by 34 (of 36 respondents, 94.4%) institutions, of which prednisolone was the preferred choice (n = 32, 88.9%). Topical cycloplegics were used at 34 (94.4%) institutions. No institution reported routine use of antifibrinolytics. Head elevation was the most deployed procedure to promote hyphema reabsorption (n = 31, 86.3%), followed by partial bed rest (n = 21, 58.3%). The majority of institutions (n = 25, 69.4%) did not routinely pursue admission for hyphema patients, although 75.0% of institutions (n = 27) scheduled follow-up visits within 48 hours of presentation. Additionally, few institutions performed routine sickle cell trait testing for patients presenting with hyphema (n = 6, 16.7%). The decision to perform anterior chamber washout varied and was often based on intraocular pressure and the speed of hyphema resolution. Conclusion: Unanimity of international institutions on hyphema management is lacking. As it stands, many current interventions have unconvincing evidence supporting their use. Evidence-based guidelines would be beneficial in guiding decision-making on hyphema management. Additionally, areas of consensus can be used as foundations for future standard of care investigations