Refine
Year of publication
- 2016 (3) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
Institute
- Medizin (3) (remove)
Acute posterior multifocal placoid pigment epitheliopathy (APMPPE) is an uncommon disorder of unknown etiology affecting the retina, the retinal pigment epithelium, and the choroid. Although several etiological factors have been suggested, none has been confirmed. We report a case of APMPPE associated with acute infection of Borreliosis. A 30-year-old man presented with a decrease in vision in the right eye of about 1-week duration. His visual acuity in the right eye was 6/36. Fundus exam revealed the presence of multiple placoid creamy retinal/subretinal lesions in the right eye. Fundus fluorescein angiography supported the diagnosis of APMPPE. Blood tests revealed the presence of concomitant acute Borreliosis infection, as confirmed by IgM. The patient received oral prednisone therapy and amoxicillin. Six weeks later, the visual acuity returned to 6/6, and the patient was symptom free. Borreliosis can have several manifestations in the eye. One of the less common presentations is an APMPPE-like picture. The clinician should suspect acute Borreliosis infection in patients presenting with APMPPE, especially when there is a history of a tick bite, when the patient has systemic symptoms, or when living in/visiting endemic areas. This may help in the prompt management of APMPPE, avoiding complications due to the condition itself, or systemic involvement secondary to the Borreliosis infection.
Purpose: To analyze the protein profile of human vitreous of untreated patients with retinal vein occlusion (RVO).
Methods: Sixty-eight vitreous humor (VH) samples (44 from patients with treatment naïve RVO, 24 controls with idiopathic floaters) were analyzed in this clinical-experimental study using capillary electrophoresis coupled to mass spectrometer and tandem mass spectrometry. To define potential candidate protein markers of RVO, proteomic analysis was performed on RVO patients (n = 30) and compared with controls (n = 16). To determine validity of potential biomarker candidates in RVO, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) was performed by using proteome data of independent RVO (n = 14) and control samples (n = 8).
Results: Ninety-four different proteins (736 tryptic peptides) could be identified. Sixteen proteins were found to be significant when comparing RVO and control samples (P = 1.43E-05 to 4.48E-02). Five proteins (Clusterin, Complement C3, Ig lambda-like polypeptide 5 (IGLL5), Opticin and Vitronectin), remained significant after using correction for multiple testing. These five proteins were also detected significant when comparing subgroups of RVO (central RVO, hemi-central RVO, branch RVO) to controls. Using independent samples ROC-Area under the curve was determined proving the validity of the results: Clusterin 0.884, Complement C3 0.955, IGLL5 1.000, Opticin 0.741, Vitronectin 0.786. In addition, validation through ELISA measurements was performed.
Conclusion: The results of the study reveal that the proteomic composition of VH differed significantly between the patients with RVO and the controls. The proteins identified may serve as potential biomarkers for pathogenesis induced by RVO.
Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of the virtual reality training simulator Eyesi to prepare surgeons for performing pars plana vitrectomies and its potential to predict the surgeons’ performance.
Methods: In a preparation phase, four participating vitreoretinal surgeons performed repeated simulator training with predefined tasks. If a surgeon was assigned to perform a vitrectomy for the management of complex retinal detachment after a surgical break of at least 60 hours it was randomly decided whether a warmup training on the simulator was required (n = 9) or not (n = 12). Performance at the simulator was measured using the built-in scoring metrics. The surgical performance was determined by two blinded observers who analyzed the video-recorded interventions. One of them repeated the analysis to check for intra-observer consistency. The surgical performance of the interventions with and without simulator training was compared. In addition, for the surgeries with simulator training, the simulator performance was compared to the performance in the operating room.
Results: Comparing each surgeon’s performance with and without warmup trainingshowed a significant effect of warmup training onto the final outcome in the operating room. For the surgeries that were preceeded by the warmup procedure, the performance at the simulator was compared with the operating room performance. We found that there is a significant relation. The governing factor of low scores in the simulator were iatrogenic retinal holes, bleedings and lens damage. Surgeons who caused minor damage in the simulation also performed well in the operating room.
Conclusions: Despite the large variation of conditions, the effect of a warmup training as well as a relation between the performance at the simulator and in the operating room was found with statistical significance. Simulator training is able to serve as a warmup to increase the average performance.