Background Parvimonas micra is known as a causative agent of chronic periodontal disease. This Gram-positive obligate anaerobic coccus was cultured from the ocular surface of blowout fracture-related orbital cellulitis progressing to panophthalmitis. Case presentation The patient was a woman in her fifties who had panic disorder and subsequently was a victim of domestic violence. These factors led to delayed consultation. At the initial visit to an ophthalmologist, the ocular surface of the right eye was covered with pus. Swelling of the upper and lower eyelids prevented the eyelid from closing and exophthalmos, severe corneal ulcer, panophthalmitis, and no light perception were observed. Head computed tomography revealed an old blowout fracture and chronic sinusitis with orbital cellulitis. P. micra were isolated from culture of pus samples from the sinus and from the ocular surface. Conclusions There is a possibility that P. micra invaded the orbit via the fragile bony site and caused orbital cellulitis, severe corneal ulcer, and panophthalmitis that required enucleation. In cases of coexisting old blowout fracture and chronic sinusitis, the chronic sinusitis should be treated as quickly as possible.

Purpose: To compare the surgical results in cases of primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachments between standard scleral buckling (SSB) and scleral buckling with chandelier illumination (SBC) and to analyze the differences in SBC surgical results between an experienced ophthalmologist and inexperienced ophthalmologists. Methods: Consecutive surgical case series of 155 eyes that underwent scleral buckling were retrospectively reviewed and divided into four groups: SSB performed by an experienced ophthalmologist (n=54), SBC performed by an experienced ophthalmologist (n=52), SBC performed by inexperienced ophthalmologists (n=40), and SSB performed by inexperienced ophthalmologists (n=9). Then these four groups were compared. Results: No significant differences were observed between SSB and SBC procedures both performed by the experienced ophthalmologist with regard to demographics, preoperative findings, contents of the surgery, intraoperative complications, retinal reattachment, postoperative findings and postoperative complications. Between SBC performed by the experienced ophthalmologist and SBC performed by the inexperienced ophthalmologists, no significant differences were found regarding intraoperative complications, retinal reattachment, postoperative findings and postoperative complications. Between SSB and SBC procedures both performed by the inexperienced ophthalmologist, a significant difference was found regarding intraoperative complications. Conclusion: There were no significant differences in surgical results between SSB and SBC when both were performed by the experienced ophthalmologist. In addition, the surgical results were equal between the experienced ophthalmologist and the inexperienced ophthalmologist as far as SBC was concerned. Learning scleral buckling skills by using SBC is a reasonable course of action for inexperienced ophthalmologists.