Refine
Year of publication
- 2022 (5) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (5)
Has Fulltext
- yes (5)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (5)
Keywords
- Arteria ophthalmica (1)
- Blindness (1)
- Filler (1)
- Glabella (1)
- Mini-monovision (1)
- Non-diffractive EDOF-IOL (1)
- Occlusion (1)
- Ophthalmoplegia (1)
- Optical phenomena (1)
- Presbyopia (1)
Institute
- Medizin (5) (remove)
Purpose: Filler injections for aesthetic purposes are very popular, but can have far-reaching and irreversible consequences. This report describes the course of a patient with devastating complications after glabellar hyaluronic acid injection, their pathomechanism, management and outcome.
Observations: A healthy, 43-year-old woman underwent her first hyaluronic acid injection in the glabella and went blind on her left eye immediately thereafter. Massaging of the injection area and observation were performed, before she presented with swelling of the left forehead and upper lid, ptosis, complete ophthalmoplegia and blindness in our hospital. Immediate massaging of the globe and systemic therapy including acetylsalicylic acid, tinzaparin sodium and cortisone was initiated and hyaluronidase injections in the injection area were performed. In the further course, the patient developed necrotic and hemorrhagic skin and mucosal lesions, lagophthalmos, anterior and posterior segment ischemia and globe hypotonia with consecutive globe deformation. In the follow-up of 2.5 months, lid swelling, lagophthalmos and ptosis resolved and keratopathy improved but blindness, skin lesions and strabismus with reduced eye motility were still present and madarosis and early enophthalmos were detected.
Conclusions and Importance: The outcome of ophthalmic artery occlusion after hyaluronic acid filler injection is poor. Sufficient knowledge about facial anatomy, the implementation of filler injections and the management of complications is essential for the practitioner. The patient should be clarified about potential and even rare risks of these procedures.
Purpose: The use of a non-diffractive extended-depth-of-focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) with slight myopia of −0.5 D on the non-dominant eye increases the spectacle independence and has good subjective tolerance with optical phenomena comparable to those of a monofocal IOL. This case report describes the course of a myopic patient who underwent refractive lens exchange, didn't tolerate mini-monovision and received IOL exchange therefore.
Observations: A healthy, 62-year-old male with myopia of approximately −5 D underwent refractive lens exchange with a non-diffractive EDOF-IOL on both eyes with slight myopia on the non-dominant left eye (mini-monovision). The operation was performed without any complications, postoperative treatment was due to the clinic's standard procedure. Two weeks postoperative the patient presented with uncorrected distance visual acuity of 0.0 logMAR, a subjective refraction of −0.25/−0.25/142° and corrected distance visual acuity of 0.1 logMAR on the right eye. On the left eye, distance visual acuity was 0.4 logMAR with a subjective refraction of −0.5/−0.75/9° (intended mini-monovision) and corrected distance visual acuity of 0.0 logMAR. Binocular distance visual acuity was 0.0 logMAR. The patient complained about the occurrence of optical phenomena at dim light while driving a car and subjective reduced visual acuity. After an IOL exchange on the left eye with the implantation of the same type of non-diffractive EDOF-IOL aimed for emmetropia, the patient was symptom-free and reported no more subjective complaints.
Conclusions: Despite the satisfying subjective and objective visual outcome which is proven in multiple studies, the subjective perception of a mini-monovision with a non-diffractive EDOF-IOL can vary individually. A preoperative assessment of the patient's needs and tolerance of a mini-monovision is crucial for a satisfying postoperative outcome.