CASE REPORT #1

 

Case Summary:

A 74-year-old African American female presented for an annual exam and follow-up care for Grave's Ophthalmopathy. She reported chronic symptomology that included tearing, photophobia, swollen lids, pain behind the eyes, and intermittent diplopia. Her previous care had been somewhat fragmented due to a complex medical and psychosocial history. Objective testing corroborated the likelihood of her primary diagnosis as the cause of the reported symptomology. Over the following year, there was evidence of mild progression of the Grave's Ophthalmopathy. Both social service and neuro-ophthalmologic consultations have been initiated to better manage this patient's condition and to coordinate multi-disciplinary healthcare efforts. Palliative treatment of the reported symptoms and detailed patient education/counseling were also undertaken.

 

Case Report:

M.C. is a 74-year-old African American female who presented as an established patient to the Illinois Eye Institute (IEI) on July 28, 1997 for a general eye examination. She was not presently employed outside of the home M.C. reported chief complaints that included intermittent diplopia, dizziness, tearing, foreign body sensation, photophobia, lid swelling, and pressure behind the eyes chronically for several years with frequent, spontaneous exacerbation's and remissions for the last several years. She further reported a gradual increase in both frequency and severity of the above symptoms.

M.C. has been followed as a patient at IEI sporadically since 1990. She has voluntarily re-entered and discontinued treatment in accordance with her financial situation and frustrations about the chronic nature of her condition. Her last ocular examination at IEI was on 11/27/95, as she has not been compliant with the recommended follow-up regimen. She has sought no other vision care. Her primary ocular diagnoses included Grave's ophthalrnopathy, compound hyperopic astigmatism, presbyopia, early nuclear sclerotic cataracts, and borderline intraocular pressures, and left hypotropia. She has previously been prescribed separate distance and near spectacle prescriptions (the former containing vertical prism), and has been placed on a daily regimen of ocular lubrication. Compliance with these treatment modalities was also sporadic. Her family ocular history was unremarkable.

M.C. 's last general medical examination was approximately one month ago where she reported that her care has been equally sporadic due to the same psychosocial factors discussed above and because of frequent disagreements with her health care plan. Her primary medical diagnoses included Grave's disease, cardiomegaly, hypertension, status post CVA, and questionable SLE. Her current daily medications include Synthroid, Lanoxin, Cordarone, Lasix, Vasotec, and Hydralazine. She reported allergies to certain radiographic contrast media and had a family medical history that was remarkable for thyroid disease and various forms of cancer.

 

Ocular Evaluation:

Uncorrected visual acuities at distance were 20/40 OD, 20/40 0S, and 20/30 OU. Corrected visual acuity's at through habitual of +4.25 -0.75 x 030 OD and +4.25-0.75 x 150 OS were 20/40 OD and 20/50 OS at 14 inches. Manifest refraction in the distance yielded -0.50 DS OD (20/30+) and p1-0.50 x 150 OS (20/30+) with a +2.50 add required at near to achieve 20/25 0U at 16 inches. 5 prism diopters base down OD and 5 prism diopters base up OS were required to provide fusion in primary gaze of the distance for a majority of viewing time. This represents a significant myopic shift and a slight increase in vertical prism from the last recorded spectacle prescription. Cover test showed an 8 prism diopter left hypotropia at distance uncorrected and a 4 diopter left hypotropia at near through habitual reading prescription. Extra-ocular motility testing showed a grade 2 bilateral restriction in up gaze with some discomfort and a slight increase m symptomology in upgaze in horizontal extremes of gaze. Pupils were round, regular, and equally reactive to light with no afferent pupillary defects. Confrontation fields in each eye were full to finger counting. Color vision, tested via Ishihara plates, showed no defects in either eye. Keratometry readings were 43.75/45.50 OD and 44.00/45.12 OS with grade 1 distortion and fluctuation upon blinking. Forced duction testing revealed an equivocal positive result in attempted up gaze. Blood pressure was 135 I 85 RAS. Biomicroscopy was remarkable for a significant lagophthalmus OD>0S, trace left lid retraction, bilateral incomplete blink, grade 1+ lid swelling OU, grade 1+ inferior comeal SPK OU, tear break-up time of 2 seconds OU, and Grade 1 cortical/nuclear sclerotic lenticular changes OU. Palpebral apertures were measured atI 1lmm OD and 12.5mm OS. Exophthalmometry, as measured by Hertel, was l8mm OD and 18.5mm OS with a 96mm base. Tonometry, as measured by applanation technique, was 18 mmHg OD and 19 mmHg OS. A dilated flindus evaluation was performed using 1% Tropicamide and 2.5% Phenylephiiine in each eye. The fundus evaluation was essentially unremarkable, with no retinal folds or optic disc swelling indicative of compressive optic neuropathy. Cup to disc ratios of 0.55 x 0.55 OU with normal neuro-retinal rims and distinct margins, and an artery to vein ratio of 0.6 were found OU. Each macula was clear with a dim, but distinguishable foveal reflex. The right eye showed a longstanding area of myelination approximately 1 disc diameter superior to the optic disc. The vitreous and peripheral retinas of both eyes were unremarkable. An automated, threshold visual field and orbital ultrasound were strongly recommended to the patient at this visit, but both were declined due to the time and effort required.

The patient's primary ocular assessments for this visit included Grave's ophthalmopathy -atypical stage 5, longstanding vertical tropia, simple myopia, myopic astigmatism, early cortical/NS cataracts with presumed myopic shift, and dizziness of unknown etiology. The patient was placed on a regular regimen of ocular lubrication (6X/day) and cold compresses, separate distance and near prescriptions were written with appropriate prism corrections, and telephone/written correspondences were both initiated the patient's internist. A full neurologic evaluation with appropriate imaging studies of the head/orbits, and a screening test for diabetes mellitus were requested. The patient was educated about the chronic yet manageable nature of her ocular diagnoses, and admonished about the importance of compliance with both treatment and follow-up regimens. She was also urged to reconsider undergoing both the visual field and orbital ultrasound testing. A follow-up date for 4 months was established.

 

Follow-up # 1:

M.C. returned on August 9, 1997 for an emergency follow-up visit, complaining of blur and
diplopia with her new spectacle prescriptions and confusion over the use of the ocular lubricants. Visual acuity's, as measured through her new distance prescription, were 20130+ OD and 20/30+ OS. Single vision was found to be present in primary distance gaze for the vast majority of the time. Near vision, as measured through the patient's new reading only prescription, was found to be 20/25 OU with no diplopia reported. The prescriptions were verified and found to be as written. Entrance tests and biomicroscopy showed no significant changes from her previous exam one month earlier. Upon further questioning, it became apparent that the patient had confused the use of the two prescriptions.

M.C. was re-educated about the correct use of her spectacle prescriptions, as well as the most efficacious use of ocular lubrication for her condition. She discussed, at length, being both emotionally and financially overwhelmed by her healthcare issues and personal circumstances, but declined a social service referral. She also declined further ophthalmic testing at this time, but agreed to keep her follow-up appointment in 3 months and to call me if she again begins to feel overwhelmed by her ocular treatment regimen or diagnoses.

 

Follow-up #2:

M.C. failed to show for her scheduled appointment. Both written and telephone contact were attempted to no avail.

 

Follow-up #3:

M.C. returned to clinic for her next appointment on June 3, 1998. She complained of more frequent diplopia with distance viewing, dryness and mucoid discharge gradually increasing upon awakening in the AM, more pronounced tearing and photophobia than previously, and an increase in the pressure sensation behind her eyes. In short, all of M.C.'s previous subjective complaints seemed to be gradually worsening. The patient was extremely fatigued and overwrought, declining a complete examination, but agreeing to a limited, problem-oriented exam, today. The patient's medical history was unchanged except that Hydalazine had been eliminated from her medication regimen.

Visual acuity's, as measured through the patient's present spectacle prescriptions, were unchanged from the previous exam, however, 2 more vertical prism diopters were required to allow single vision in the distance for a majority of viewing time in primary gaze. Extraocular motility testing showed a grade 2+ restriction bilaterally in up gaze with slightly earlier pain and diplopia than had been previously noted. Biomicroscopy showed grade 2 diffuse conjunctival injection with some concentration near the recti muscles, grade 2 bilateral lid edema, and grade 2+ inferior corneal SPK. Exophthalmometry, as measured by Hertel, was 19mm OU with a 96 mm base. The patient declined further testing today.

The decision was made to defer any changes in the patient's spectacle prescriptions until she was better rested and less distraught. The frequency of ocular lubrication was increased during the day to 1 gtt every 1-2 hours. A bland ointment was still to be used at bedtime with the addition of lid taping as needed to improve comfort in the AM. The patient was also instructed to use extra pillows at night to maintain a more upright posture and, thereby, help alleviate some of the lid swelling. M.C. agreed to compliance with these measures and also expressed willingness to accept a social service referral. A consultation request was filled out and sent to the IEI Social Work department. She also agreed to return in 4 weeks for further ophthalmic testing.

 

 

Follow-up #4:

M.C. returned to clinic for her next visit on July 23, 1998. She reported significant improvement in all of her ocular symptoms except the diplopia at distance, which she felt was essentially stable. She also reported contact with the IEI Social Work department, which she felt was having a very constructive effect on her stress level. The patient also reported that, after consultation with her primary care physician, Prozac had been added to her daily medications, and she was feeling optimistic about the effects of these interventions.

Manifest refraction revealed a slight change in her distance prescription: OD was found to be -0.25-1.00 x 035 (20/30) and OS was found to be p1 -0.50 x 150 (20/40+). Additionally, a total of 12 vertical prism diopters was split between the two eyes to maintain single vision in primary distance gaze. This represents a net increase of 2 prism diopters. Entrance tests, such as EOM's , pupils, color vision, confrontation fields, and cover test appeared unchanged from previous exams. Biomicroscopy showed significant improvement of conjunctival injection, corneal SPK, and lid swelling. Lagophthalmus, slight bilateral lid retraction, and incomplete blink appeared unchanged from previous exams. The nuclear sclerotic changes of the left lens appeared slightly more advanced. Forced duction testing also showed no clinically significant change from one year prior. Tonometry, as measured by applanation technique, showed pressures of 19 mm Hg OD and 20 mm Hg OS. Attempted up gaze showed an increase in lOP of approximately 3 mm Hg in each eye. A dilated fundus exam that was completed today also failed to show clinically significant changes from prior exams. A Humphrey Th24-2 automated threshold visual field was performed and showed no clinically significant changes OU. Orbital ultrasonography was also performed, today, and showed mild thickening of both inferior recti muscles and questionable thickening of the left medial rectus muscle. The orbital apex did not appear significantly attenuated.

M.C.'s primary ocular diagnoses remained Grave's ophthalmopathy, longstanding left vertical tropia, compound myopic astigmatism, myopic astigmatism, and early cataracts. Over the past year, there was slight progression of the sign and symptoms related to the Grave's ophthalmopathy, but improved compliance and more aggressive palliative treatment with ocular lubrication has caused significant recent improvement. A new spectacle prescription with slightly increased vertical prism has been recommended to meet the patient's distance viewing needs. Social service intervention and counseling have clearly been helpful in alleviating much of the patient's chronic frustration and anxiety. A follow-up visit to check on performance with the new distance spectacles has been scheduled for one month. Once again, both telephone and written correspondence were attempted with the patient's PCP to advise of her ophthalmic status and to request neuro-ophthalmologic consultation with appropriate imaging studies. This would rule

out the presence of certain serious systemic disease entities and, hopefully, better monitor the patient's clinical presentation.

 

Discussion:

Until recently, Grave's disease was very poorly understood. Even now, we don't completely understand its etiology or pathogenesis. The medical literature generally agrees that Grave's disease is essentially an autoimmune phenomenon in which an immune response develops to certain follicular cells of the thyroid gland and/or fibroblasts and myocytes of the orbits. Auto-antibodies to these cells are generally produced, often in the presence of certain abnormal lymphocytic regulation. Certain abnormal HLA markers have also been implicated, although the association is clearly imperfect.

The people most likely to develop Grave's disease are women between their third and fifth decades of life. A familial history of thyroid disease and smolting are further risk factors. While males are only one fifth as likely to develop Grave's disease as women, when it does occur it is far more likely to run a severe course. M. C. was definitely a member of this high- risk group.

Between 20 and 40 percent of Grave's disease patients eventually develop clinically significant Grave's ophthalmopathy, often close in temporal sequence to the recognition of abnormal systemic function (especially thyroid). However, it is important to remember that the ophthalmopathy can either antedate the systemic fmdings or follow successful systemic treatment of the associated thyroid disorder by many months. Here again, the case of M.C. applies. A significant portion of Grave's patients will also remain euthyroid.

From the optometric point of view, the earliest changes to look for in diagnosing Grave's ophthalmopathy are the indicators of soft tissue inflammatory infiltration such as lid retraction, upper lid lag on down gaze, tremor of the closed lid, and decreased blink frequency. Close in temporal sequence to these fmdings will be conjunctival injection or chemosis, especially around the recti insertions, and lid swelling or edema. Next in usual sequence is the development of clinically significant proptosis (generally greater than 22-24 for African Artiericans or showing greater than 3mm asymmetry) which further accentuates the startled appearance of the patient. A further progression of inflammatory infiltration may now involve the extra-ocular muscles, with secondary motility disturbances, restriction, and/ or diplopia. As the disease progresses to its most sight-threatening stages, corneal scarting from exposure Idessication and compressive optic neuropathy from EOM compression at the orbital apex, are possible.

There are a number of clinical optometric tests for detection and monitoring of these fmdings at every stage. There are, however a some key points to remember, overall. One, Grave's ophthalmopathy is not necessarily a linear progression; certain stages can be absent entirely and some can be accentuated out of sequence. Two, instead of trying to tie the clinical picture to an arbitrary numeric scale, the optometrist should monitor for qualitative changes that may herald the possible occurrence of vision-threatening changes, and concentrate on palliating symptoms wherever possible. Patient quality of life is always a priority. Third, Grave's can be a diagnosis of exclusion, and it is important to rule out the presence of other potentially serious medical problems or medication side-effects that may be contributing to the clinical picture. Fourth, it is important to regard patients holistically, especially when attempting to manage a chronic, sometimes nebulous disease entity like Grave's. Long term patience, follow-through, and communication are important.

The above case of M.C. is clearly illustrative of these points. Her clinical presentation of Grave's ophthalmopathy is hardly typical of the linear progression of classification in identiiying stage 5 disease. Her past medical history is rather complex with several uncertainties due to inconsistency of care, and she is utilizing a number of medications that could significantly be altering her clinical presentation. Specialty referral were clearly necessary to rule out certain serious systemic problems and to better monitor her potential visual prognosis. In addition, this patient had enough stress in her life to defmitely impact the potential success of medical or optometric care for a number of reasons. Patient yet aggressive palliative treatment of her symptoms and social service consultation made a tremendous difference in her satisfaction with care and quality of life. Unfortunately, there has been little success in achieving either cooperation or communication with several participating providers of M.C. 's healthcare plan.

 

 

CASE REPORT #2

The following is a case involving a child with oculocutaneous albinism. The ocular findings in albinism include nystagmus, decreased visual acuity; hypopigmentation of retinal tissue, and macular hypoplasia. Early detection and management of these ocular findings is important. In the following case the uncorrected refractive error was contributing to developmental and behavioral abnormalities in this child. The optometric care of this child includes determining his visual and binocular capabilities so that proper referrals in the areas of low vision and vision development may be made in the future.

Patient Initials AG

DOB : 6/26/95

Sex : Male

 

Case History:

An 18-month old male (AG) was presented to our clinic in November 1996 in the care of his foster mother (Ms. B). AG is an infant born with oculocutaneous albinism and a toxicity to crack cocaine. Ms. B complained of AG's abnormal visual behavior (preference of dark.rooms, "getting on top of the television") severe photophobia, "eye dancingt1, and clumsiness (falling down, bumping into things). She also suspected a strabismus, but was unsure of the nature, frequency or laterality of the turn. Specific information in regard to the birth history was not available. Developmental delays of about 6-7 months in motor skills do exist (e.g. crawled at 10 months, walked at 13 months). The medical history was unremarkable (no asthma, seizures, diabetes, etc.). No medications were being taken nor did medical allergies exist.

 

Diagnostic Data (Visit #1):

 

Visual Acuity Evaluation

AG had no ability to fixate for a quantitative measure of uncorrected visual acuity. Neither Tellar Acuity (preferential looking) nor Cardiff Acuity cards produced a response. AG was able to fixate and follow a transilluminator light at 10" (in a dark room) monocularly and binocularly.

 

Ocular Motility Evaluation

A full range of movement was present in all fields of gaze, no restrictions existed. A congenital nystagmus with a mixed waveform (pendular and right jerk) was apparent. No null point existed. An alternating intermittent exotropia of approximately 20 prism diopters existed at distance and near. The deviation was comitant (the magnitude was 20 A in all 9 fields of gaze). No response was achieved on stereopsis testing with a Stereo flv or the Basic Binocular Testing Series.

 

Refractive Condition

Secondary to poor fixation dry retinoscopy results were invalid. A cycloplegic refraction (gtts 1.0 % Cyclogel, 1.0 % Tropicamide, 2.5 % Neosynephrine) revealed -10.00 OU. Retinoscopy was done monocularly secondary to the alternating exotropia. Due to poor patient cooperation, trial framing of this Rx produced no measure of visual acuity, which could predict improvement of visual ifinction with the proper myopic correction.

 

Ocular Health Evaluation

- Pupils equal, round, reactive to light (-) Afferent Pupillary Defect

 

Biomicroscopy Examination

OD

STRUCTURE

OS

 

clear

External Lids/ Lashes

 

clear

 

pink, smooth

Palpebral Conjunctiva

 

pink, smooth

 

no infection

Bulbar Conjunctiva

 

no infection

 

clear

Cornea

 

clear

 

open

Angle Approach

 

open

 

deep and quiet

Anterior Chamber

 

deep and quiet

 

(+) transillumination

Iris

 

(+) transillumination

 

clear

Lens

 

clear

 

soft

Digital Intraocular Pressures

 

soft

Dilated Fundus Examination

OD

STRUCTURE

OS

 

0.1 with distinct borders

C/D Ratio

 

0.1 with distinct borders

 

Hypoplasia, (-) reflex

Macula

 

Hypoplasia, (-) reflex

 

(-) tortuosity, normal limits

Vessels

 

(-) tortuositym normal limits

 

Hypopigmentation of retinal pigment epithelium

Periphery

 

Hypopigmentation of retinal pigment epithelium

Assessment:

- Oculocutaneous Albinism

- Congenital Nystagmus

- High Myopia OU

- Suspicion of decreased visual acuity secondary to macular hypoplasia OU

- Alternating X(T) at distance and near

- Cocaine and crack toxicity from birth with secondary developmental delays

 

Plan:

A spectacle Rx of -10.00 was given to AG. The Rx was prescribed for full time wear. Ms. B. was instructed to monitor changes in AG's visual behavior and motor skills and report the results at a 6 week follow-up appointment. The re-evaluation will consist of a repeat attempt to measure visual acuity. Cover testing is to be done with and without the spectacle correction.

 

Diagnostic Data (Visit #2, Follow-up):

AG has been wearing his -10.00 spectacle Rx for one month. Ms. B. reports that AG rarely removes his glasses. She has noticed significant changes in AG's overall functioning. He has shown a tremendous increase in activity and "gets into everything now". He is now able to sit at a proper viewing distance to enjoy the television. Ms. B notes that the eye turn (XT) is present, but less frequent.

A measure of visual acuity was attempted with Cardiff Visual Acuity cards. A questionable result of 20/64 OD, OS visual acuity was achieved. This is a rather high VA for a child with oculaocutaneous albinism and subsequent macular hypoplasia. To rule out any possible amblyopia a small object (colored sprinkles) was placed in the palm of the examiners hand while the patient was coaxed to pick it up monocularly. AG would not comply with this task. Cover testing (with and without the Rx) revealed an intermittent alternating exotropia at

distance and near. Estimation of magnitude was done by the Kappa /Hirschberg method.

A 20°(XT) was present at distance and near with and without the spectacle prescription.

A pendular nystagmus was present in all fields of gaze. No limitation of eye movements

were noted.

Retinoscopy performed over the current -10.00 prescription was OD plano, OS -0.50 sphere. Again, secondary to the manifestation of the alternating X(T) retinoscopy was done monocularly.

 

Assessment/Plan:

AG is to continue full time wear of his myopic prescription. Considerable improvements in visual and motoric behavior have been noted since the dispensing of the spectacle Rx. Ms. B was educated on the possibility of a contact lens fitting in the future, as AG matures. The benefits of contact lens wear include maximizing visual acuity and dampening the nystagmus. The management of the exotropia was also discussed. The reasons for treatment include attempting to establish binocular vision and any cosmetic factors which may be of concern (especially in the future). The primary options of a base in prism prescription with or without the incorporation of a vision training program will be addressed as AG matures. Ms. B was also educated on the option of strabismus surgery if all other treatment options were unsuccessful.

AG and Ms. B are to return to our clinic in in order to run a Visually Evoked Potential (VEP) to determine the maximum visual acuity. Due to the patient's age and limited attention span visual acuity evaluation has not been possible. The VEP measure may give some insight regarding the best achievable visual acuity. If visual acuity measures are reduced (as is expected), then proper education and direction regarding low Vision intervention as the patient matures will be in order.

 

Diagnostic Data (Visit #4, VEP Evaluation):

A Flash Visual Evoked Potential was perfomed. Estimated visual 20/200 OD, OS. No response was elicited to a Pattern VEP.

 

Case Analysis:

The visual acuity measure found with the flash VEP was reduced. Patients with oculocutaneous albinism suffer with reduced visual acuity secondary to the macular hypoplasia. The patient's care giver was educated about the reduced visual acuity in AG. It was also noted that electrodiagnostic measures in patients of this age are ofien difficult to obtain. The validity of the visual acuity findings will be known when we are able to repeat the test with the patient's increasing maturity.

The necessity of a low vision evaluation and the possible need for low vision aids in the future were discussed. Ms. B was given the number of our LOW vision clinic to contact with any specific questions she may have. We are to see AG in our pediatric clinic for follow-up in 4 months. The determination of when a low vision evaluation is to be performed will be decided as we monitor AG's progress and maturity.

NOTE: I was unable to continue follow-up with AG secondary to my career relocation.

 

 

 

CASE REPORT #3

T.B., a 30-year old white female, presented for a comprehensive eye examination without ocular or visual complaint. History was significant for long-standing stable floaters OS>OD and rare photopsia OU. Dilated fundus examination revealed an inferior rhegmatogenous retinal detachment OS. The patient was referred for immediate evaluation by a retinal specialist. The elevated area was small enough that the posterior border of the detachment was treated with laser retinopexy to contain the area of retinal separation. To date, the area of uninvolved retina has continued to be flat and intact without any progression of the retinal detachment.

 

Patient Data:

Patient's Irutials: T.B.

Age: 30 years old

Gender: Female

Occupation: Accountant

Date of examination: 5/9/97

 

Previous Vision Care:

Prior to the care outlined in this report, T.B. had received comprehensive optometric care from various clinicians since 4/6/88. The previous records reflected good binocular oculomotor function and good ocular health including the absence of posterior vitreous detachment, retinal breaks, or peripheral retinal degeneration OU. Refractive correction for compound myopic astigmatism contained the following parameters.

Spectacle Correction: OD -7.25-0.50 x165 20/15-2

  • OS -7.25-0.50 x017 20/15-2
  • Contact Lenses: OD 20/15

    OS 20/15

     

    Lens Type

    Base Curve

    Diameter

    Power

    OD

    Acuvue

    8.8

    14.0

    -6.50

    OS

    Acuvue

    8.8

    14.0

    -6.50

    Pertinent History:

    T.B. presented for a comprehensive examination without any visual or ocular complaints. She desired a new supply of disposable contact lenses. She reported clear and comfortable vision at distance, intermediate, and near with both her glasses and contact lenses. She had achieved 14 hours a day of comfortable contact lenses wear. She reported good compliance with her two week lens replacement schedule and lens care regimen which included daily rubbing, rinsing, and soaking with Renu Multipurpose solution. Her current contact lenses were two weeks old. The patient had experienced a small amount of floaters OS>QD but stated they were long-standing and unchanged for many years. A rare occurrence of photopsia described as a tiny pinpoint of light had also been previously experienced OU, but not recently. She specifically denied any incidence of trauma, diplopia, asthenopia, or headaches. She also denied any personal or famlly history of glaucoma, strabismus, retinal disease, diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, or breathing problems. She was on no medications.

     

    Eye Health Assessment:

    Slit lamp examination revealed clean lids with good tonicity and apposition to the globe. The lashes and lid margins were clear of debris or meibomian inspissation OU. The bulbar conjunctiva was clear without chemosis OU. There was no discharge OU. The corneas were clear with no fluorescein starning OU. Nasal and temporal anterior chamber angles were a grade IV OU measured with the Von Herrick method. Pupils were equal, round, and reactive to light and accommodation without afferent defect. Intraocular pressures measured 15mmHg OD,OS at 1:30 p.m. with applanation tonometry. Dilated fundus evaluation (Instruments used: BIO and Superfield) with 2 gtts. Paremyd OU revealed an extremely blond fundus with a flat and intact retinal periphery absent of holes, tears, or degenerations 360 degrees OD. The inferior retinal periphery of the left eye showed a local elevation of sensory retina encompassing an area extending 4 disc diameters from the ora serrata. There was a sharp demarcation line along the posterior border of the elevation and two retinal breaks evident at the anterior border near the ora serrata. There was no pigmentation response around either retinal break or the demarcation line separating elevated from flat retina. There was also no evidence of any intraretinal fibrosis or intraretinal cysts. The superior temporal quadrant of the left eye had a small area of lattice degeneration without retinal breaks. There was no evidence of posterior vitreous detachment, vitreous cells, or vitreous hemorrhage OU. The cup to disc ratio was .3H/ .3V OD and .35H/ .4V OS with well perfused intact rim tissue 36000U. Each macula exhibited a large and bright reflex. The retinal vessels had a 3/5 artery to vein ratio without any evidence of nicking or banking. Automated visual field screening (Humphrey 40 point testing strategy) revealed full fields (40/40 OU). No visual field constriction could be exhibited with confrontations OU.

    The contact lens fit showed a stable paralimbal soft lens fit with good centration, 360 degree corneal coverage, and 0.50mm movement OU. Each lens surface contained a trace amount of scattered protein deposits.

     

    Refractive and Binocular Assessment:

    The refractive diagnosis was compound myopic astigmatism QU. Binocularly balanced refraction showed no change from the previous spectacle or contact lens prescription. Analysis of binocular oculomotor function showed an orthophoria posture at distance and at near. Thirty seconds of stereoacuity was achieved testing with Randot circles. Negative relative accommodation measured +2.00 while positive relative accommodation measured -2.00. Ocular motility was smooth and full without overaction OU.

     

    Supplementary Pertinent Data:

    I have enclosed copies of the correspondence from the retinal specialist detailing the diagnosis and management of the retinal detachment and the ensuing follow-up care in his office.

     

    Analysis and Diagnosis:

    The presence of a retinal break with vitreal fluid elevating the sensory retina is consistent with a diagnosis of a rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. Typically, a retinal break is caused by retinal traction or overlying traction from the vitreous. In this case, the degree of myopia and early lattice degeneration served as two sources of traction. The absence of any pigmentation response, intraretinal fibrosis, or intraretinal cysts indicated that it was not a chronic, long-standing lesion. To aid determination of a possible time of onset of the detachment, the issue of flashes and floaters was readdressed. There was no change in the patient's response of denying any increase in the size, number, or frequency of floaters over any definable time period. Without being able to establish any chronicity of the lesion, it was managed as though it were of acute onset.

     

    Optometric Management:

    I explained to T.B. the nature of retinal detachment formation. This included tractional stress supplied by myopic stretching and lattice degeneration, retinal hole formation, and the process of vitreal fluid penetrating a retinal break and separating the layers of the retina. The severity of the condition was stressed in that the area of retinal separation can progress and that retinal function is lost in any area that is detached. The need for urgent evaluation and treatment by a retinal specialist was emphasized to prevent any progression of the detachment and any potential loss of vision. It was explained that many forms of treatment are quite successful in preventing further progression. The eventual elected form of treatment depended largely on the size, location, and extent of the detachment and could include scleral buckle surgery, laser surgery, or cryosurgery. Regardless of the treatment procedure, a key factor in successful outcomes is the early intervention of treatment from the time of onset to lirnit the extent of retinal damage.

    To that end, T.B. was referred for an immediate evaluation by a retinal specialist. She was instructed to not eat or drink anything and to sit upright as she made her way to the ophthalmologist's office. Later that afternoon, I phoned to confirm that she kept the appointment and arrived safely. As the attached correspondence shows, the retinal specialist chose to perform a laser retinopexy procedure based on the small area, inferior location, and shallow nature of the detachment. The procedure was performed over the course of two separate office visits (5/9/97 and 5/22/97) due to the patient having a vasovagal response during the first application of laser burns. A total of 674 laser burns were successfully applied to seal off the area of retinal elevation.

     

    Follow-up Care:

    After follow-up visits with the retinal specialist in June of 1997, September of 1997, and March of 1998, T.B. was released from ophthalmological care and instructed to continue her comprehensive eyecare with the optometry clinic. In doing so, T.B. returned to our clinic on 4/1/98 for comprehensive examination. She reported no change in the size, number, or frequency of floaters and that the retinal specialist was pleased with her treatment outcome. She had no other visual or ocular complaints and there was no change in any ocular or medical health history except for starting on oral contraceptives.

    Examination revealed stability of refractive and binocular measurements, as previously noted, with best corrected acuity of 20/15 OD,OS. Pupils were equal, round, and reactive to light and accommodation without afferent defect. Dilated fundus examination revealed a stable optic nerve, retinal vessel, and macular appearance. The retinal periphery OD was flat and intact 360 degrees and absent of retinal breaks or degenerations. A well defined, continuous line of chorioretinal scarring was evident at the posterior border of the retinal detachment OS. The inferiorly detached retina still exhibited rnrld elevation. The remaining area of the left retina was flat and intact. The small area of lattice degeneration in the superior temporal quadrant OS remained free of retinal breaks. The vitreous was clear and quiet OU.

    Despite the great success of the prompt referral and treatment, T.B. was educated on her risk of recurrence of a retinal detachment in her left eye as well as developing a similar condition in the right eye. It was stressed to her the importance of being acutely aware of any increase in floaters or any flashes of light. If any such symptom was experienced, she should report to our clinic immediately. If not, she was instructed to return to our clinic each year for comprehensive evaluation including dilated fundus examination.

     

    May 9, 1997

    Dear Greg:

     

    TB is a patient who has been a contact lens wearer for a number of years. She has been relatively asymptomatic with the exception of a few floaters that she had in the last six months. Her past medical history is positive for hypoglycemia. She is on no medications and has no allergies.

    Her best vision today with a contact was 20/25 0.U. The corneas were clear and thin. The anterior chambers were deep and quiet. There were no cells in the vitreous. The pressures were 19 and 20. The fundus on the right showed a cup to disc ratio of approximately 0.3. The vessels1 macula and periphery were normal. The left eye showed a cup to disc ratio of approximately 0.3 with a normal appearing disc, macula and vessels. The inferior periphery was remarkable for a localized retinal detachment with two holes in the retina inferiorly. There was an early high water mark, indicating some degree of chronicity to the subretinal fluid.

    I agree entirely with your assessment that TB has a retinal detachment inferiorly in the left eye. I talked with her about some of the management options that we have available to us and with this localized detachment inferiorly, she elected to go ahead and attempt a prophylaxis with laser retinopexy around the area. We plan on checking her again in about two weeks and will keep you informed of her progress.

    RBC:taw

     

    June 5, 1997

     

    Dear Greg:

    TB is a patient with a localized detachment of her retina in the left eye. We treated her with laser retinopexy on 5/22/97. She returned today with 20/25 vision in the eye. There was a nice surround of laser photocoagulation burns surrounding the margins of the detachment. There has been no extension and we are going to continue to watch her closely to determine whether or not there is any progression. I think this is a safe decision based on the inferior nature of the detachment and her relative young age. We will keep you informed of her progress.

    RBC:tmw

     

    September 9, 1997

     

    Dear Greg:

    I saw TB back on 9/9/97 She is a patient with a localized retinal detachment inferiorly in her left eye. I lasered around the detachment back in May and it this point, her vision remains 20/25 in the eye. The detachment has not moved significantly since her visit and in fact, the elevation appears to be somewhat less today than was present on her last visit.

    I am very pleased with her progress thus far. I plan on checking her again in about six months.

    RBC:unw

     

    July 14, 1998

     

    Dear Greg:

    This letter is in response to your request for a more complete accounting of the management of TB localized retinal detachment in the left eye. When we initially saw her on 5/9/97, we attempted a laser retinopexy around the detachment inferiorly in the left eye. TB has a vasovagal reaction after approximately 308 laser spots in that eye. We subsequently had her return on 5/22/97, where the laser photocoagulation session was completed. A total of 674 laser spots were used to provide a barrier to extension of the retinal detachment. She returned on 6/5/97, at which her visual acuity was 20/30 in the eye. There was a nice surround of laser retinopexy scars inferiorly. On 9/9/97, she returned with 20/30 vision in the eye. Again, there was no change in the detachment. On 3/10/98, the vision was 20/40 J1 and the detachment had not extended beyond the boundary of the laser photocoagulation scars. I will mention parenthetically that the choice for laser photocoagulation in the management of retinal detachments is somewhat controversial. The choice for photocagulation was made in this instance based on the asymptomatic nature of the discovery of the detachment, the inferior location and the chronic nature of the detachment. As you know, ordinarily scleral buckling is the management choice but in consultation with the patient we made the choice for laser retinopexy with close follow-up to document any evidence of progression. I hope this answers any questions you may have regarding my management of TB.

    Sincerely,

     

    RBC:tmw

     

     

     

    Case Report #4

     

    Summary:

    JL., a married, 35 year old Caucasian male, presented to the clinic on June 23, 1997. He was complaining of a red, painful, light sensitive right eye that began four days prior to his visit and was continuing to worsen. J. L. was diagnosed with an acute, non-granulomatous, anterior uveitis that resolved after using homatropine hydrobromide 5.0% and prednisolone acetate 1.0%. J. L. presented to the clinic February 21, 1998, complaining that the left eye was light sensitive and uncomfortable. He was diagnosed with an acute, non-granulomatous, anterior uveitis. It resolved after using cyclopentolate hydrochloride 1.0% and prednisolone acetate 1.0%. J. L. was subsequently diagnosed with seronegative ankylosing spondyl itis.

     

    Case Report:

    J. L. a married, 35 year old, Caucasian male, presented to the clinic on June 23, 1997. He was complaining of a red, painful light sensitive right eye. He stated that the problem began suddenly four days prior to his visit. He reported that he felt his condition was worsening, and he described his pain as a deep, throbbing ache. He was initially seen by a family practice physician who prescribed tobramycin 0.2%, one drop three times a day for conjunctivitis. He commented that tobramycin did not seem to help. When questioned, he reported an ocular history significant for a refractive error and a negative medical history.

    Using his habitual spectacle prescription, distance acuities were measured as 20/20. O.D. and 20/20, 0.S. The pupil of the right eye was miotic, 3 mm in diameter, fixed, and poorly responsive to light. The left pupil was reactive to light, 4 mm in diameter, and responsive to light. There was no sign of an afferent pupillary defect. Motilities had a full range of motion, 0.U. Goldmann applanation tonometry was performed at ~6: 15. The intraocular pressure was 12 mmHg, 0.D. and 12 mmHg, 0.S.

    Slit lamp examination was performed. In the right eye, the cornea had fine keratic precipitates on the endothelium that resembled an Arlt's triangle. The anterior chamber had about a 3+ flare and a 2+ cell and an estimated grade III VanHerrick angle. The crystalline lens was clear. The iris had moderate posterior synechiae that involved 50% of the pupillary margin. The bulbar conjunctiva was injected diffusely, but more intense perilimbally. Unfortunately, a dilated exam was not performed due to the patient's photophobia.

    The left eye was examined in the same fashion. The cornea was clear. The anterior chamber was deep and quiet with an estimated grade III VanHerrick angle. The crystalline lens was clear. The conjunctiva was quiet, and the iris was flat with a round, reactive pupil.

    My impression was that J. L. had an acute, non-granulomatous, anterior uveitis with anterior synechiae, 0.D. At 16:15, two drops of homatropine hydrobromide 5.0% and phenylephrine 2.5% were instilled into the right eye. After 30 minutes the right pupil was reexamined. and the synechiae were almost broken. Only one small area persisted. J. L. was prescribed the following for the right eye:

    1. Prednisolone acetate 1.0%, one drop every hour while awake,

    2. Homatropine hydrobromide 5.0%, one drop every 12 hours,

    3. Phenylephrine 2.5% one drop every hour for the remainder of the day while he was awake.

    He was instructed to return in 24 hours for an evaluation.

    J. L. returned the following day. He reported the eye did not feel much different, but it was not worse. He was using the following medications: homatropine hydrobromide 5.0% and prednisolone acetate 1.0%.

    Entrance distance acuities were measured using his habitual prescription. The right eye was 20/40, and the left eye was 20/20. The right pupil was fixed and dilated. Slit lamp examination of the right eye was performed. The fine keratic precipitates were still noticeable on the corneal endothelium. The anterior chamber had a 3+ flare and a 2+ cell. Many of the posterior synechiae had broken, but a few persisted making a slightly oval pupil. The crystalline lens had pigment deposits on the capsule remaining from the synechiae. The conjunctiva was still injected. The left eye continued to be quiet and unaffected.

    It appeared to me that the uveitis was stable, and the posterior synechiae had nearly resolved. J. L. was advised to discontinue the phenylephrine 2.5 %, continue the homatropine hydrobromide 5.0%, one drop every twelve hours, and continue the prednisolone acetate 1.0%, one drop every hour in the right eye. He was instructed to return in one day.

    J. L. returned on June 25, reporting that the right eye was watery, but that it was not worse. He was using homatropine hydrobromide 5.0%, one drop every twelve hours, and the prednisolone acetate 1.0%, one drop every hour in the right eye.

    Distance acuities were measured using his habitual prescription. The right eye was 20/20, and the left eye was 20/20. The right pupil was dilated with a round pupil. Intraocular pressure was measured as 12 mmHg, O.D. with a Goldmann applanation tonometer at 17:00. Slit lamp examination of the right eye was performed. The fine keratic precipitates were less dense on the corneal endothelium. The anterior chamber had a 1+ flare and a 2+ cell. All but one of the posterior synechiae had broken. The crystalline lens had pigment deposits on the capsule remaining from the synechiae. The conjunctiva was less injected. The left eye continued to be unaffected.

    A dilated fundus exam was performed on the right eye. The vitreous was clear without any cells. The optic nerve had a healthy rim with a pink color and distinct margins. There was no sign of elevation or hemorrhage. The cup to disc ratio was approximately. 0.2. The retinal vasculature was healthy without any vasculitis. The macula was flat with a positive foveal reflex. The retina was attached without any signs of inflammation such as a retinitis or choroiditis.

    It was my impression that the uveitis was improving and limited only to the anterior segment. I advised J. L. to continue the homatropine hydrobromide 5.0%, one drop every twelve hours, and the prednisolone acetate 1.0%, one drop every two hours in the right eye. I instructed him to return in two days.

    J. L. returned to the clinic on June 27, 1997, stating that the right eye felt better and that his vision was blurry when he read. He was using homatropine hydrobromide 5.0%, one drop every twelve hours, and the prednisolone acetate 1.0%, one drop every two hours in the right eye.

    Entrance distance acuities were measured using his habitual prescription. The right eye was 20/20, and the left eye was 20/20. The right pupil was round and dilated. Slit lamp examination of the right eye was performed. The fine keratic precipitates continued to decrease on the corneal endothelium. The anterior chamber had a 1 + flare and a 2+ cell. All of the posterior synechiae had broken. The crystalline lens had pigment deposits on the capsule remaining from the synechiae. The conjunctiva was less injected. The left eye continued to be quiet and unaffected.

    It was my impression that the uveitis was improving, and J. L. was instructed to the same medications at the same interval. He was advised to return to the clinic in four days.

    J. L. returned to the clinic on July 1, 1997, stating that the right eye was doing well and was less blurry. He was using homatropine hydrobromide 5.0%. one drop every twelve hours, and the prednisolone acetate 1.0%, one drop every two hours in the right eye.

    Distance acuities were measured using his habitual prescription. The right eye was 20/20, and the left eye was 20/20. The right pupil was dilated. His intraocular pressure was 13 mmHg, O.D. and 13 mmHg, O.S. using a Goldmann applanation tonometer at 17:02. Slit lamp examination of the right eye was performed. The fine keratic precipitates had almost resolved. The anterior chamber had a trace flare and a I + cell. The conjunctiva was calm. The left eye continued to be quiet and unaffected.

    I advised J. L. that his uveitis had significantly improved, but that the medications he was using needed to be closely tapered to prevent reoccurrence and side-effects. Since J. L. did not have a previous history of uveitis, I felt that it was not necessary to perform any additional laboratory testing. I instructed him to discontinue the homatropine hydrobromide 5.0%, continue the prednisolone acetate 1.0% Q.I.D. in the right eye, and return in one week.

    J. L. returned on July 8, stating that his right eye was much better. Because I was out of town, he was seen by my colleague. He was using prednisolone acetate 1.0% four times a day in the right eye. He found that the eye had improved considerably, and instructed him to taper the prednisolone acetate 1.0% to T.I.D. for one week, B.I.D. for one week, and once a day for one week in the right eye. He advised J. L. to return to the clinic in two weeks.

    He returned to the clinic on July 22, 1997, stating that his eyes were a little itchy, but doing much better. He was using the prednisolone acetate 1.0% once a day in the right eye.

    Examination revealed distance acuities of 20/20 0.D. and 20/20, 0.S. using his habitual spectacle prescription. Intraocular pressure was measured with a Goldmann applanation tonometer in the right eye only It was 14 mmHg at 17:00. Slit lamp examination of the right eye was performed. The fine keratic precipitates had resolved. The anterior chamber was quiet without any cell or flare. The conjunctiva was calm. The left eye continued to be unaffected.

    I advised J. L. that the uveitis had resolved. He was instructed to continue the prednisolone acetate 1.0% once a day for one more week in the right eye only and to return to the office if there was any reoccurrence in the right eye or involvement of the left eye.

    On February 21, 1998, J. L. presented to the clinic complaining that the left eye was red. He stated that the problem began three days prior to his visit. When questioned about his problem he stated that the problem began gradually, quickly worsened over the past three days, and that the left eye had a mild ache to it. He reported no changes to his ocular or medical history since his last visit. He was not taking any medications.

    Corrected entrance distance acuities were measured using his habitual prescription. The right eye was 20/20, and the left eye was 20/20. Under normal examination lighting the right pupil was 5 mm, and the left pupil was 4 mm. With the lights dimmed, the pupils were measured as 6 mm, O.D. and 4 mm, 0.S. Under bright light the pupils were measured as 4 mm, O.D. and 3 mm 0.5. There was no sign of a afferent pupillary defect to either eye. Motilities had a full range of motion, O.U. Tonometry was 14 mmHg, O.D. and 10 mmHg, 0.5. using a Goldmann applanation tonometer at 17:45. There was no palpable preauricular lymphadenopathy.

    Slit lamp examination was performed on both eyes. In the right eye the cornea was clear. The anterior chamber was quiet and deep. The crystalline lens was clear, and the conjunctiva was calm. The iris was flat with a round pupil.

    The left eye was examined in the same fashion. The cornea had fine keratic precipitates on the endothelium. A +2 flare and a + 1 cell was noted in the anterior chamber. The crystalline lens was clear. The conjunctiva was injected, especially around the limbus. The iris was flat, and there were no signs of any posterior synechiae.

    I diagnosed J. L. with acute, non-granulomatous, anterior uveitis, 0.5. He was prescribed Cyclogel 1.0%, one drop three times a day, 0.5. and prednisolone acetate 1.0%, one drop every two hours, 0.5. He was scheduled to return in two days.

    J. L. returned to the clinic on February 23. He stated that the left eye was feeling much better, but all of his joints were aching. He reported using Cyclogel 1.0% T.I.D., 0.S. and prednisolone acetate 1.0% Q2H, 0.S.

    Distance acuities were measured using his habitual prescription. The right eye was 20/20, and the left eye was 20/20. The left pupil was round and dilated. His intraocular pressure was 11 mrnHg, 0.D. and 11 mmHg, 0.S. using a Goldmann applanation tonometer at 16:00. A slit lamp examination was performed. The right eye was quiet and unaffected. In the left eye, the fine keratic precipitates were improving. The anterior chamber had a + I flare and an occasional cell. The conjunctiva was slightly injected.

    A dilated examination was performed on the left eye. The vitreous was clear without any cells. The optic nerve had a healthy rim with a pink color and distinct margins. There was no sign of elevation or hemorrhage. The cup to disc ratio was approximately, 0.2. The retinal vasculature was healthy without any vasculitis. The macula was flat with a positive foveal reflex. The retina was attached without any signs of inflammation.

    I advised J. L. that the uveitis was improving. He was instructed to continue the Cyclogel 1.0% T.I.D. and the prednisolone acetate 1.0% Q.I.D., 0.S. Now that both eyes had experienced an acute, non-granulomatous uveitis, I felt it was important to rule out a systemic etiology such as Rieter's syndrome or ankylosing spondylitis. I scheduled an appointment on March 28, 1998, with Dr. Yu, the rheumatologist at the clinic. Since I would be out of town at an educational meeting, J. L. was scheduled a follow up examination with four days.

     

    Returning to the clinic on February 27, 1997, J. L. reported the left eye was much better. He was using the medications as instructed. I noted that there was a trace amount of flare and no cell in the anterior chamber and the cornea was clear in the left eye. He instructed J. L. to continue the Cyclogel 1.0% at bedtime for 3 days then stop. The prednisolone acetate 1.0% was to be tapered to one drop T.I.D. for 7 days, one drop B.I.D. for 7 days, and one drop Q.D. for 7 days, 0 S J L was to return as needed.

    I examined J. L. at his scheduled appointment. After his examination, I was advised that J. L. was diagnosed with seronegative ankylosing spondylitis. He was prescribed Daypro 600 mg twice a day with food.

    Since his diagnosis, I have spoken with J. L., and he states that he is doing much better. He reported no symptoms of uveitis. His arthropathy had improved considerably. I advised him to return if he has any reoccurrence.