Notesdata:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/eb108/eb108e1225c6a34726896a3a71243e18df6f7721" alt="what is notes.io? What is notes.io?"
![]() ![]() Notes - notes.io |
TPRK without mitomycin C appears to be a safe and effective treatment for FS-LASIK corneal flap complications.
To investigate the anatomical and functional outcomes of revision surgery after failed primary surgery for idiopathic macular hole (MH).
All consecutive patients with MH were identified from a cohort of patients operated between 2014 and 2018 at the CHU de Québec-Université Laval (Québec). The clinical and anatomical features of patients with unclosed MH after primary surgery were retrospectively collected. Our primary outcome was MH nonclosure rate after revision surgery. Our secondary outcomes were best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) with ETDRS scale and MH size of eyes with revision surgery preoperatively and at 3 and 12 months after revision surgery.
In our cohort of 1085 eyes, 926 eyes met inclusion criteria and were analyzed in the study. We identified 22 eyes with failed primary surgery (2.4%), of which 20 underwent revision surgery. We had no bilateral MH in these 22 eyes. The nonclosure rate of MH after revision surgery was 15%. The mean final BCVA for closed MH after revision surgery was 55 ± 19 letters. Super-TDU molecular weight Compared to the initial presentation, the mean change in visual acuity (VA) for closed MH was +4 ± 31 letters and +16 ± 17 letters at 3 and 12 months after the revision surgery, respectively. At initial presentation, patients with failed primary surgery had a baseline MH size of 665 ± 226
m. The mean MH size after failed primary surgery was 607 ± 162
m and 546 ± 156
m for the three unclosed MHs one month after revision surgery.
The success rate of revision surgery in eyes with unclosed MH is 85%. After successful revision surgery, eyes demonstrated an improvement in VA and closure of the MH.
The success rate of revision surgery in eyes with unclosed MH is 85%. After successful revision surgery, eyes demonstrated an improvement in VA and closure of the MH.
Bardet-Biedl syndrome (BBS) is a rare multisystem developmental disorder. In this study, we report the genetic causes and clinical manifestations in two Chinese families with BBS.
Two families were recruited in this study. Family A was a four-generation family with four affected and 15 unaffected members participating in the study, and family B was a consanguineous family with one affected and three unaffected members participating. Whole exome sequencing was performed in the two families, followed by a multistep bioinformatics analysis. Sanger sequencing was used to verify the variants and to perform a segregation analysis. Comprehensive ocular and systemic examinations were also conducted.
Novel compound heterozygous variants c.235T > G (p.T79P) and c.534 + 1G > T were detected in the
gene in family A, and known homozygous variant c.748G > A (p.G250R) was detected in the
gene in family B. Both families presented with retinitis pigmentosa; however, except for polydactyly, all other systemic manifestations were different. All of the affected family members in family A were overweight with a high body mass index (range from 26.5 to 41.9) and high blood pressure. Family A also presented with a delay in the onset of secondary sex characteristics and genital anomalies, while other systemic abnormalities were absent in family B.
This study presents one family with two novel
variants, expanding the variant spectrum of BBS, and one family with a known homozygous
variant. The different phenotypes seen between the families with
and
variants will contribute to the literature and our overall understanding of BBS.
This study presents one family with two novel BBS2 variants, expanding the variant spectrum of BBS, and one family with a known homozygous MKKS variant. The different phenotypes seen between the families with BBS2 and MKKS variants will contribute to the literature and our overall understanding of BBS.
To compare the efficacy of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) versus intravitreal injection (IVI) of ranibizumab (RBZ) in the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) associated with vitreomacular interface abnormalities (VMIA).
The records of patients presenting with DME and VMIA throughout 2016 to 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into 2 groups group I received IVIs of RBZ and group II underwent PPV with internal limiting membrane peeling. The main outcome measures were the change in the LogMAR corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) and central subfield thickness (CSFT) on optical coherence tomography over 6 months.
At 6 months, mean CDVA improved by 0.22 ± 0.21 in group I patients (
< 0.001), while in group II, it improved only by 0.09 ± 0.22 (
< 0.115). Fifty-five percent of group I and 60% of group II patients had stable CDVA (within 2 lines from baseline) at 6 months. Significant improvement in vision (gain of 2 or more lines) was seen in 45% and 30%, respectively. Worsening of vision (loss of 2 or more lines) was seen only in 2 patients in group II, but none in group I. The mean CSFT improved significantly in both groups (by 162
and 216
, respectively;
< 0.001). The mean CSFT at 6 months was similar in both groups (354
and 311
, respectively;
=0.172).
Both treatments resulted in anatomical improvement of DME with concurrent VMIA. Visual improvement was more pronounced in the IVI group, although this may have been affected by other confounding factors.
Both treatments resulted in anatomical improvement of DME with concurrent VMIA. Visual improvement was more pronounced in the IVI group, although this may have been affected by other confounding factors.
To evaluate and compare corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF) in normal thin (NT) healthy corneas with central corneal thickness (CCT) of 470-500
m with matched thickness in keratoconus suspect (KCS) and keratoconus (KC) eyes.
A total of 103 eyes in three groups were included prospectively NT, KCS, and KC groups based on clinical examination and Pentacam findings. Corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF) were measured using the ocular response analyzer (ORA). CCT, CH, and CRF were compared between the three groups and statistically analyzed by variance tests.
The three groups consisted of 44 NT, 26 KCS, and 33 KC. The mean CH measured was 8.689 ± 1.775, 9.051 ± 1.1190, and 8.129 ± 0.8539 mmHg in NT, KCS, and KC eyes, respectively. The mean CRF was 8.441 ± 1.663, 8.337 ± 1.114, and 7.2422 ± 1.3110 mmHg in NT, KCS, and KC eyes, respectively. Within the range of central corneal thickness (470-500
m), only mean CRF was statistically significantly different between the NT and KC (
< 0.
My Website: https://www.selleckchem.com/products/super-tdu.html
![]() |
Notes is a web-based application for online taking notes. You can take your notes and share with others people. If you like taking long notes, notes.io is designed for you. To date, over 8,000,000,000+ notes created and continuing...
With notes.io;
- * You can take a note from anywhere and any device with internet connection.
- * You can share the notes in social platforms (YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, instagram etc.).
- * You can quickly share your contents without website, blog and e-mail.
- * You don't need to create any Account to share a note. As you wish you can use quick, easy and best shortened notes with sms, websites, e-mail, or messaging services (WhatsApp, iMessage, Telegram, Signal).
- * Notes.io has fabulous infrastructure design for a short link and allows you to share the note as an easy and understandable link.
Fast: Notes.io is built for speed and performance. You can take a notes quickly and browse your archive.
Easy: Notes.io doesn’t require installation. Just write and share note!
Short: Notes.io’s url just 8 character. You’ll get shorten link of your note when you want to share. (Ex: notes.io/q )
Free: Notes.io works for 14 years and has been free since the day it was started.
You immediately create your first note and start sharing with the ones you wish. If you want to contact us, you can use the following communication channels;
Email: [email protected]
Twitter: http://twitter.com/notesio
Instagram: http://instagram.com/notes.io
Facebook: http://facebook.com/notesio
Regards;
Notes.io Team