Carpentier Samuel J, Jung Jennifer L, Patnaik Jennifer L, Pecen Paula E, Palestine Alan G
Department of Ophthalmology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Ophthalmol Ther. 2020 Jun;9(2):293-303. doi: 10.1007/s40123-020-00245-x. Epub 2020 Mar 10.
To determine if differences exist between pediatric ophthalmologists and uveitis ophthalmologists in the treatment of pediatric uveitic cataracts and placement of intraocular lenses.
Uveitis ophthalmologists and pediatric ophthalmologists were surveyed via an online poll regarding their therapeutic management of pediatric uveitic cataract and intraocular lens (IOL) placement.
Sixty-two responses from uveitis ophthalmologists and 47 responses from pediatric ophthalmologists were recorded. According to 79% of all responses, uveitis was not a contraindication for primary IOL implantation in patients with controlled intraocular inflammation. Pediatric ophthalmologists were more likely to respond that the presence of chronic juvenile idiopathic arthritis-associated iridocyclitis, pars planitis, or recurrent acute anterior uveitis is a contraindication for primary IOL implantation in pediatric cases with full control of intraocular inflammation. There was no consensus within either specialty with regard to the preferred IOL material for lens implantation. Uveitis ophthalmologists were more likely to report the use of intravenous and intravitreal steroids for perioperative treatment. In cataract surgery for a child with recurrent acute anterior uveitis, a higher percentage of uveitis ophthalmologists (71%) than pediatric ophthalmologists (50%) responded that the posterior capsule should be primarily opened. A higher percentage of uveitis ophthalmologists also stated that anterior vitrectomy should be performed at the time of cataract surgery in all three uveitis types.
Pediatric ophthalmologists and uveitis ophthalmologists have similar approaches to the management of pediatric uveitic cataract removal and IOL insertion, but several differences remain between these subspecialties. Continued collaboration between the subspecialties would be helpful to better develop consistent criteria to improve patient care.
确定小儿眼科医生和葡萄膜炎眼科医生在小儿葡萄膜炎性白内障治疗及人工晶状体植入方面是否存在差异。
通过在线调查,就小儿葡萄膜炎性白内障的治疗管理及人工晶状体(IOL)植入情况,对葡萄膜炎眼科医生和小儿眼科医生进行了调查。
记录了葡萄膜炎眼科医生的62份回复和小儿眼科医生的47份回复。在所有回复中,79%的人认为,对于眼内炎症得到控制的患者,葡萄膜炎并非一期植入人工晶状体的禁忌证。小儿眼科医生更倾向于认为,在眼内炎症完全得到控制的小儿病例中,慢性幼年特发性关节炎相关虹膜睫状体炎、周边葡萄膜炎或复发性急性前葡萄膜炎的存在是一期植入人工晶状体的禁忌证。在人工晶状体植入首选材料方面,两个专业领域均未达成共识。葡萄膜炎眼科医生更倾向于报告在围手术期使用静脉和玻璃体内类固醇。在为复发性急性前葡萄膜炎患儿进行白内障手术时,回复称应首先打开后囊的葡萄膜炎眼科医生比例(71%)高于小儿眼科医生(50%)。更高比例的葡萄膜炎眼科医生还表示,在所有三种葡萄膜炎类型的白内障手术时均应进行前部玻璃体切除术。
小儿眼科医生和葡萄膜炎眼科医生在小儿葡萄膜炎性白内障摘除及人工晶状体植入的管理方法上相似,但这些亚专业之间仍存在一些差异。亚专业之间持续的合作将有助于更好地制定一致的标准,以改善患者护理。