Search

Abstract Purpose Evaluation of the patency and position of perforated lacrimal punctal plugs implanted for treating punctal stenosis together with quantitative assessment of the precorneal tear film using anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT). Methods In a prospective study, the lower punctum of 54 eyes of 29 patients implanted with perforated punctal plugs were examined using AS-OCT during the early postoperative period. Preoperative tear meniscus height (TMH) and tear meniscus area (TMA) were evaluated. Postoperatively, the patency of the plug, its position, TMH and TMA were evaluated, and the results were correlated with postoperative epiphora. Munk scale was used for epiphora grading. Results Using AS-OCT, 48 (88.9%) plugs were found in proper position while 6 (11.1%) were rotated. The lumen of the plugs was completely patent in 47 (87%) plugs, partially obstructed in 2 (3.7%) plugs and completely occluded in 5 (9.2%) plugs. There was a statistically significant postoperative decrease of TMH and TMA (P

Abstract Background To compare the therapeutic effects of subthreshold micropulse laser (SML) versus intravitreal injection of ranibizumab in treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) both anatomically using optical coherence tomography (OCT) and functionally using best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and multifocal electroretinogram (mfERG). Methods his study was an interventional prospective randomized comparative study. The study included 120 eyes classified into 3 groups: Group 1 included 40 eyes of 28 patients treated by SML laser, group 2 included 40 eyes of 32 patients treated by intravitreal injection of ranibizumab, and group 3 (control group for mfERG) included 40 eyes of 20 patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) of more than 10 year duration with no signs of diabetic retinopathy (DR). BCVA measurements, OCT and mfERG were done for the cases before and after interference and were followed up for 6 months Results By the end of the follow up period, BCVA significantly improved by 31% in group 1 vs 93% in group 2 with a statistically highly significant difference between the two groups (p value