Dataset Information

Iris varix: 10-year experience with 28 eyes.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to describe the clinical characteristics, multimodality imaging findings, and clinical course of iris varices.

Methods

Retrospective, noncomparative, observational case series of 28 eyes of 26 patients with iris varices, diagnosed between 2007 and 2017, has been used.

Results

The mean (±SD) age was 58.3 ± 12.5 years (median 57.5, range 37-81). Patients were 57.7% male and 27% hypertensive. Varices were bilateral in two patients. The mean and median visual acuities were both 20/20 (range 20/16-20/40). Intraocular pressures were 16 mmHg (10-23 mmHg). Secondary glaucoma did not occur. The inferotemporal iris quadrant was affected in 75%. A single varix was seen in 64% and 36% appeared multiple. Varix orientation was radial in 57% and circumferential in 21%. Combined radial and circumferential varix orientation was noted in 18%. One had independent radial and circumferential varices in separate quadrants. A single episcleral sentinel blood vessel directed to the varix was present in 36%. Ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM) showed a slightly increased mean iris thickness of 0.8 mm and multiple echolucent iris stromal vascular channels. Iris angiography showed no leakage of dye. Managed by observation over a mean follow-up of 37.7 months (range, 3-129), 96.4% eyes were stable and one (3.6%) regressed. No corectopia, ectropion uveae, hyphema, or metachronous anterior segment benign or malignant tumors occurred.

Conclusion

Iris varix is primarily located in the inferotemporal quadrant and not associated with dysmorphic pupillary findings, progression, secondary glaucoma, or malignancy. Iris varices were benign vasculopathies with no associated ocular or vision-related morbidity.

SUBMITTER: Jain P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6407407 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Iris varix: 10-year experience with 28 eyes.

Jain Puneet P Finger Paul T PT

Indian journal of ophthalmology 20190301 3

<h4>Purpose</h4>The purpose of this study is to describe the clinical characteristics, multimodality imaging findings, and clinical course of iris varices.<h4>Methods</h4>Retrospective, noncomparative, observational case series of 28 eyes of 26 patients with iris varices, diagnosed between 2007 and 2017, has been used.<h4>Results</h4>The mean (±SD) age was 58.3 ± 12.5 years (median 57.5, range 37-81). Patients were 57.7% male and 27% hypertensive. Varices were bilateral in two patients. The mean ...[more]

PMID: 30777952

Similar Datasets

Project description:PURPOSE:To systematically investigate the frequency and types of allegations related to radiology practice handled by the Dutch Medical Disciplinary Court in the past 10 years. METHODS:The Dutch Medical Disciplinary Court database was searched for verdicts concerning radiology practice between 2010 and 2019. The association between the number of verdicts and time (years) was assessed by Spearman's rho. Other data were summarized using descriptive statistics. RESULTS:There were 48 verdicts (mean 4.8 per year). There was no significant association between the number of verdicts and time (Spearman's rho <?0.001, p?=?0.99). Most allegations were in breast imaging and musculoskeletal radiology (each 18.8%), followed by interventional radiology, head and neck imaging, and abdominal imaging (each 12.5%), neuroradiology and vascular imaging (each 10.4%), and chest imaging (4.2%). There were 46 allegations against radiologists (95.8%) and 2 against residents (4.2%). The most common allegation (37.5%) was error in diagnosis. In 20.8% of verdicts, the allegation was judged (partially) founded; disciplinary measures were warnings (n?=?8) and reprimands (n?=?2). An appeal was submitted by the patient in 11 cases and by the radiologist in 3 cases. All appeals by patients were rejected, whereas 2 of the 3 appeals by radiologists were granted and previously imposed disciplinary measures were reversed. CONCLUSION:Allegations against radiologists at the Dutch Medical Disciplinary Court are relatively few, their number has remained stable over the past 10 years, and a minority were judged to be (partially) founded. We can learn from the cases presented in this article, which may improve patient care. KEY POINTS:• The frequency of allegations against radiologists at the Dutch Medical Disciplinary Court is relatively low and has not exhibited any temporal change over the past 10 years. • These allegations reflect patient dissatisfaction, but this infrequently equals malpractice. • Knowledge of the circumstances under which these allegations have arisen may improve patient care.

Project description:BackgroundPatients with a rectal foreign body (RFB) are still a rare entity in general surgery departments but with an increasing incidence over the last years. This case is sometimes difficult to treat, and due to a lack of standardized treatment options, the aim of the study was to present our clinical experiences with the diagnostic and therapeutic approach to RFBs and a review of the currently available literature.Materials and methodsData were collected retrospectively from the patient's records of 20 patients who were treated due to an RFB between 2006 and 2016. Patient's demographics, circumstances of insertion, inserted objects, clinical presentation, laboratory and imaging results, as well as surgical treatment and duration of hospital stay were analyzed. Additionally, a review of the literature was performed with the search items "rectal foreign body" and "surgical therapy". Because many publications were just case reports, we did not perform a meta-analysis or a systematic review.ResultsTwenty-two cases in 20 patients (80% male) presented to the emergency room. The mean age was 38.5±13.7 years. In 68.2% of the cases, the cause of RFB was due to sexual preferences. The following objects were inserted: six dildos, three vibrators, two bottles, one glass, one deodorant, one apple, one fever thermometer, multiple glass fragments and razor blades in one patient and six unknown objects. For 18 RFBs, manual peranal removal without anesthesia was possible in the emergency room, but two patients required intravenous analgesia. Two patients were transferred to the operating room and the foreign body was removed via the anus under general anesthesia. Open surgery with a laparotomy was necessary for two complicated cases. One patient was in need of surgery due to a vacuum generated by the RFB, whereas the second patient suffered from a sigmoid perforation. In all cases, there was no morbidity or mortality.ConclusionIn most cases, the removal of an RFB can be performed peranally in the emergency room without further complications, therefore representing the therapy of choice for RFB. Only in cases with perforation, acute abdomen, or failed peranal approaches, surgery is indicated to remove the foreign body.

Dataset Information

Iris varix: 10-year experience with 28 eyes.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Iris varix: 10-year experience with 28 eyes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets