Seminars in Ophthalmology最新文献

{"title":"Managing vitreoretinal complications in uveal melanoma: Surgical treatment and practical considerations.","authors":"Rodrigo Anguita, Hung-Da Chou, Vishal R Raval, Vidhi Bajpai, Lorenzo Ferro Desideri, Enrico Bernardi, Rumana N Hussain, Min Kim, Adrian T Fung, Basil K Williams, Maura Di Nicola, Mandeep S Sagoo, Lyndon da Cruz, Bertil Damato, Jens Folke Kiilgaard","doi":"10.1080/08820538.2024.2381774","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08820538.2024.2381774","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the past few decades, the primary management for uveal melanoma has evolved from enucleation to eye-preserving treatments. However, despite achieving a high rate of local tumour control, complications following eye-preserving treatments still occur and are partly responsible for functional loss and secondary enucleation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature review by a broad international panel.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We summarised the current literature on utilizing vitreoretinal (VR) surgery for managing the complications of uveal melanoma. We also provided insights from the authors' personal experience and practical recommendations for clinical care.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>With the advancement of VR instruments and surgical techniques and the combination of VR and ocular oncology knowledge (\"Onco-VR\"), it is now possible to manage or even prevent complications such as vitreous haemorrhage, retinal detachment, and toxic tumour syndrome.</p>","PeriodicalId":21702,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142081460","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Readership Awareness Series - Paper 13: Key Concepts of Translational Research.","authors":"Mohammad Javed Ali, Ali Djalilian","doi":"10.1080/08820538.2024.2392358","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08820538.2024.2392358","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":21702,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":"1-3"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142036881","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Loss to Follow Up Among Glaucoma Patients: An IRIS® Registry (Intelligent Research in Sight) Retrospective Cohort Analysis.","authors":"Andrew M Williams, Lauren M Wasser, Julie Cassidy, Hsing-Hua Sylvia Lin","doi":"10.1080/08820538.2024.2391826","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08820538.2024.2391826","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To identify prevalence of and risk factors for loss to follow up (LTFU) among a national cohort of patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from the IRIS® Registry (Intelligent Research in Sight) database from 2014 through 2019 to assess LTFU among adult patients with POAG. POAG patients with at least one clinical encounter in 2014 were included. LTFU was defined as exceeding one year without a clinical encounter during the study period.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 553,663 glaucoma patients, 277,019 (50%) became LTFU, of whom 184,548 (67%) never returned to care and 92,471 (33%) re-established follow-up after a lapse. Risk of LTFU was greatest among those younger than 60 years (RR = 1.38; 95% CI: 1.36-1.39) or older than 80 years (RR = 1.39; 95% CI: 1.38-1.40) compared to those in their 60s. Compared to White race, risk for LTFU was highest among Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (RR = 1.24; 95% CI: 1.17-1.31), Hispanic ethnicity (RR = 1.19; 95% CI: 1.18-1.20), and Black race (RR = 1.10; 95% CI: 1.09-1.11). Medicare insurance was associated with lower risk of LTFU (RR = 0.79; 95% CI: 0.78-0.79), whereas unknown/missing/no insurance was associated with greater risk (RR = 1.33; 95% CI: 1.32-1.34), compared to private insurance. Compared to mild-stage POAG, risk of LTFU was higher for moderate-stage (RR = 1.10; 95% CI: 1.08-1.13) and severe-stage disease (RR = 1.35; 95% CI: 1.32-1.38).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We found a 50% prevalence of LTFU among POAG patients in the IRIS Registry over a 6-year study period, with greater risk among minority groups and those with more advanced disease.</p>","PeriodicalId":21702,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141988835","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Evaluating Research Activity and NIH-Funding Among Academic Ophthalmologists Using Relative Citation Ratio.","authors":"Victoria Vought, Rita Vought, Ava Herzog, David Mothy, Janvi Shukla, Alexander B Crane, Albert S Khouri","doi":"10.1080/08820538.2024.2391838","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08820538.2024.2391838","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The objective of this study was to evaluate the relationship between research activity and National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding status of the United States (US) academic ophthalmologists.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of bibliometric data was conducted. The NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Reports (rePORTER) website was utilized to identify ophthalmology departments in the US that received NIH funding. Affiliated faculty from these institutions were then identified using NIH rePORTER and institutional websites. <i>H-index</i> was calculated using the Scopus database, and the NIH iCite tool was used to determine the Relative Citation Ratio (RCR). The <i>h-index</i> and w-RCR quantified research productivity, while m-RCR measured research impact.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data on 2688 faculty members from 66 departments we re identified, of which 21% were NIH-funded. Faculty members who received NIH-funding had significantly greater research productivity and impact as measured by <i>h-inde</i>x (32.5 vs 16.6; <i>p</i> < .001), m-RCR (2.2 vs 1.6; <i>p</i> < .001), and w-RCR (147.2 vs 70.1; <i>p</i> < .001) than their non-funded peers. When stratified by academic rank, NIH-funded faculty still had significantly higher <i>h-index</i> (16.1 vs 7.9; <i>p</i> < .001), m-RCR (2.2 vs 1.4; <i>p</i> < .001), and w-RCR (63.2 vs 61.8; <i>p</i> < .001) than non-funded peers. A similar trend was observed among non-tenured faculty members.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>NIH funding is associated with higher research productivity and impact among US academic ophthalmologists as measured by <i>h-index</i> and RCR, which suggests that NIH funding may be a critical factor in enhancing scholarly contributions of ophthalmologists.  These findings underscore the importance of continued investment in NIH funding to foster high-impact research within the field of ophthalmology.</p>","PeriodicalId":21702,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":"1-5"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141988834","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Changes in Eyelid Height Based on Intra-Operative Quantification of Levator Aponeurosis Advancement in Patients with Unilateral Ptosis.","authors":"Jose Miguel Ambat, Naoyuki Morishige, Yasuhiro Takahashi, Hirohiko Kakizaki","doi":"10.1080/08820538.2024.2388625","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08820538.2024.2388625","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To present marginal reflex distance (MRD-1) outcomes based on intra-operative quantification of levator aponeurosis advancement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty-eight patients with unilateral aponeurotic ptosis underwent anterior levator aponeurosis advancement. Distance of advancement intra-operatively was compared with MRD-1 outcomes at the immediate postoperative sitting, approximately 1 week, and 1 month period. Surgical success was defined as a symmetric MRD-1 or an MRD-1 within 1 millimeter of the contralateral eyelid.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most MRD-1 exhibited the following trends: 1) initial decrease at about 1 week and increase at 1 month (<i>n</i> = 11), 2) initial increase at about 1 week with levelling at 1 month (<i>n</i> = 8), and 3) increasing through time (<i>n</i> = 7). Success rate significantly decreased through time (<i>p</i> = .0464). The change in proportion of successful and failed surgeries was insignificant. Surgical revision rate was 10.4%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Levator aponeurosis advancement distances do not correlate with MRD-1 outcomes linearly. MRD-1 exhibited stability over time with a satisfactory success rate at 1 month.</p>","PeriodicalId":21702,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141902828","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Pediatric Toy-Related Ocular Injuries in the United States: A National Electronic Injury Surveillance System Study.","authors":"Sruti Rachapudi, Mona Kaleem","doi":"10.1080/08820538.2024.2388622","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08820538.2024.2388622","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study is to evaluate the epidemiological trends, primary ocular diagnosis, and degree of injury severity in pediatric patients after a toy-related ocular trauma.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional analysis was conducted using data from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System Study (NEISS), encompassing patients who visited emergency departments over a 5-year period from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021, with toy-related ocular injuries. Descriptive statistics were employed using Microsoft Excel.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 1439 toy-related ocular injuries identified, the mean age of injury was 6.67 ± 4.36 years. The highest proportion of injuries occurred in the 2-5 years age group (27.2%). The NEISS database classified the severity of injury - the majority of which were minor anterior segment injuries. Toy guns with projectiles were identified as the most common type of toy associated with ocular eye injury. While most injuries were minor, a small percentage was severe.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Age-appropriate toy selection and adult supervision during playtime are recommended preventive measures to mitigate the incidence and severity of traumatic eye injuries in children.</p>","PeriodicalId":21702,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":"1-4"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141894209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Dr. Google vs. Dr. ChatGPT: Exploring the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Ophthalmology by Comparing the Accuracy, Safety, and Readability of Responses to Frequently Asked Patient Questions Regarding Cataracts and Cataract Surgery.","authors":"Samuel A Cohen, Arthur Brant, Ann Caroline Fisher, Suzann Pershing, Diana Do, Carolyn Pan","doi":"10.1080/08820538.2024.2326058","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08820538.2024.2326058","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Patients are using online search modalities to learn about their eye health. While Google remains the most popular search engine, the use of large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT has increased. Cataract surgery is the most common surgical procedure in the US, and there is limited data on the quality of online information that populates after searches related to cataract surgery on search engines such as Google and LLM platforms such as ChatGPT. We identified the most common patient frequently asked questions (FAQs) about cataracts and cataract surgery and evaluated the accuracy, safety, and readability of the answers to these questions provided by both Google and ChatGPT. We demonstrated the utility of ChatGPT in writing notes and creating patient education materials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The top 20 FAQs related to cataracts and cataract surgery were recorded from Google. Responses to the questions provided by Google and ChatGPT were evaluated by a panel of ophthalmologists for accuracy and safety. Evaluators were also asked to distinguish between Google and LLM chatbot answers. Five validated readability indices were used to assess the readability of responses. ChatGPT was instructed to generate operative notes, post-operative instructions, and customizable patient education materials according to specific readability criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Responses to 20 patient FAQs generated by ChatGPT were significantly longer and written at a higher reading level than responses provided by Google (<i>p</i> < .001), with an average grade level of 14.8 (college level). Expert reviewers were correctly able to distinguish between a human-reviewed and chatbot generated response an average of 31% of the time. Google answers contained incorrect or inappropriate material 27% of the time, compared with 6% of LLM generated answers (<i>p</i> < .001). When expert reviewers were asked to compare the responses directly, chatbot responses were favored (66%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>When comparing the responses to patients' cataract FAQs provided by ChatGPT and Google, practicing ophthalmologists overwhelming preferred ChatGPT responses. LLM chatbot responses were less likely to contain inaccurate information. ChatGPT represents a viable information source for eye health for patients with higher health literacy. ChatGPT may also be used by ophthalmologists to create customizable patient education materials for patients with varying health literacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":21702,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":"472-479"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140185509","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Expressions of Concern in the Ophthalmological Literature.","authors":"Jaime A Teixeira da Silva","doi":"10.1080/08820538.2024.2332929","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08820538.2024.2332929","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":21702,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":"488-489"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140319144","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Impact of Immersive Virtual Reality on the Binocular and Accommodative Function: A Systematic Review About Literature and Its Current Limitations.","authors":"Andrea Gómez-Patiño, David P Piñero, Ainhoa Molina-Martín","doi":"10.1080/08820538.2024.2368013","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08820538.2024.2368013","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study is to analyze the scientific literature about the effect of VR on the accommodative and binocular function of healthy subjects with both normal visual conditions and binocular anomalies assessing the quality of the existing studies to detect possible limitations and improve future study designs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases with the search equation (Virtual reality OR head-mounted displays) AND (accommodation OR accommodative) AND (vergence* OR convergence OR divergence OR binocular vision). A limitation was made in terms of the date of publication from 2010 onwards, identifying a total of 198 publications. Finally, 15 publications were included in the quality analysis. After a comprehensive analysis of the publications, a quality assessment was performed using a Quality Appraisal Checklist.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Research on effects of immersive VR on accommodative and binocular function to this date was focused on quasi-experimental pre-post studies well written and with results supporting their conclusions. Unfortunately, this scientific evidence provides heterogeneous outcomes, being the results in some cases even contradictory.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Information about the devices, its interpupillary distance adjustment, the software characteristics and type of task performed by users should be better controlled in future studies. Additionally, participants accommodative and binocular baseline characteristics should be better analyzed to obtain firm conclusions about the consequences of the proper immersive VR experience on visual function.</p>","PeriodicalId":21702,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":"429-439"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141427534","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Analysis of Research Activity Among Ophthalmology Fellows.","authors":"Victoria Vought, Rita Vought, Ava Herzog, Sahas Narain, Eric D Donnenfeld","doi":"10.1080/08820538.2024.2324459","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08820538.2024.2324459","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The academic success of ophthalmology fellows may be significantly impacted by their research engagement. Evaluating the research activity of fellows by subspecialty may provide insight into trends useful for prospective applicants. The objective of this study was to assess the research activity of ophthalmology fellows in the year 2023.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ophthalmology fellowship programs were compiled using the Association of University Professors of Ophthalmology and the American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery websites. Program subspecialties were categorized as: Cornea and External Disease [CED]; Cornea, External Disease, and Refractive Surgery [CEDRS]; Glaucoma; Medical Retina [MR]; Neuro-Ophthalmology [NO]; Oculoplastics; Pediatric Ophthalmology [PO]; Surgical Retina [SR]; Uveitis; and Other. \"Other\" consisted of Oncology, Pathology, combined Oncology and Pathology fellowships. We identified current fellows using publicly available online information. Programs and fellows that did not have information available were excluded. Total publications, Hirsch index (h-index), and weighted-relative citation ration (w-RCR) were utilized as measures of research output, while total citations and mean-RCR (m-RCR) served as proxies for research impact. Duration of publishing was calculated using the years of the oldest and most recent publications. Statistical analysis was performed using Kruskal-Wallis H tests with an alpha value of .05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 373 fellows from 229 programs met our inclusion criteria. More than half of fellows were men (54.4%), and the most common degree type was MD (93.0%). Across all subspecialties, the median h-index was 3.0 (IQR = 4), m-RCR was .9 (IQR = 1.2) and w-RCR was 3.2 (IQR = 9.8). The median number of publications was six (IQR = 10, with 34 citations (IQR = 110) and 4 years of publishing (IQR = 6). We observed significant differences in h-index (<i>p</i> = .038), total publications (<i>p</i> < .001), and w-RCR (<i>p</i> = .028) by subspecialty.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We observed significant differences in research output, but no differences in research impact by subspecialty. Overall, Uveitis and Oculoplastics fellows had higher research activity, while Medical Retina and Other fellows had the lowest. This data is pertinent to better understand the landscape of ophthalmology fellowship applications.</p>","PeriodicalId":21702,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":"468-471"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140022557","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}