PurposePeripheral exudative haemorrhagic chorioretinopathy (PEHCR) is a rare disorder that is often misdiagnosed. The aim of this study was to better characterise PEHCR and to assess treatment options.Material and methodsRetrospective multicentric chart review.ResultsOf 84 eyes (69 patients) with PEHCR referred between 2005 and 2017, the most common referral diagnosis was choroidal melanoma (41.3%). Bilateral involvement was found in 21.7% of cases. Haemorrhagic retinal pigment epithelium detachment was the most common peripheral lesion (53.6%). Maculopathy was associated with peripheral lesions in 65.8% of cases. PEHCR lesions were mostly heterogeneous (58.8%) on B-scan ultrasonography. Choroidal neovascularisation was found in 10 eyes (26.3%) out of 38 eyes that underwent fluorescein angiography. Polyps were observed in 14 eyes (58.3%) out of 24 eyes that underwent indocyanine green angiography. Fifty-one eyes were treated (62.2%). Intravitreal injections (IVTI) of antivascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) were the most used treatment (36.6%) before laser photocoagulation, photodynamic therapy, vitrectomy and cryotherapy. Only vitrectomy improved visual acuity. Most lesions (65.6%) regressed at the last follow-up visit.ConclusionIn case of PEHCR, multimodal imaging is useful to avoid misdiagnosis, to characterise PEHCR lesions and to guide treatment strategies. Regression of PEHCR lesions was observed in two-thirds of the patients. Vitrectomy improved visual acuity. More than a third of patients underwent anti-VEGF IVTI. Further studies are needed to assess IVTI’s efficacy.

Introduction Exposure to blue light has seriously increased in our environment since the arrival of light emitting diodes (LEDs) and, in recent years, the proliferation of digital devices rich in blue light. This raises some questions about its potential deleterious effects on eye health. The aim of this narrative review is to provide an update on the ocular effects of blue light and to discuss the efficiency of methods of protection and prevention against potential blue light-induced ocular injury. Methods The search of relevant English articles was conducted in PubMed, Medline, and Google Scholar databases until December 2022. Results Blue light exposure provokes photochemical reactions in most eye tissues, in particular the cornea, the lens, and the retina. In vitro and in vivo studies have shown that certain exposures to blue light (depending on the wavelength or intensity) can cause temporary or permanent damage to some structures of the eye, especially the retina. However, currently, there is no evidence that screen use and LEDs in normal use are deleterious to the human retina. Regarding protection, there is currently no evidence of a beneficial effect of blue blocking lenses for the prevention of eye diseases, in particular age-related macular degeneration (AMD). In humans, macular pigments (composed of lutein and zeaxanthin) represent a natural protection by filtering blue light, and can be increased through increased intake from foods or food supplements. These nutrients are associated with lower risk for AMD and cataract. Antioxidants such as vitamins C, E, or zinc might also contribute to the prevention of photochemical ocular damage by preventing oxidative stress. Conclusion Currently, there is no evidence that LEDs in normal use at domestic intensity levels or in screen devices are retinotoxic to the human eye. However, the potential toxicity of long-term cumulative exposure and the dose-response effect are currently unknown.

The whole exome analysis of a consanguineous Turkish family revealed MAGEB4 as a possible new X-linked cause of inherited male infertility. This study provides the first clue to the physiological function of a MAGE protein.

Observational studies are needed to confirm the long-term efficacy and safety of Ozurdex® intravitreal implant in real life. Among 29 patients with persistent diabetic macular edema (DME), of whom 14 (48%) patients did not have any previous treatments and 22 (76%) any previous antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections, significant visual acuity (VA) improvement was observed with a mean gain of 13.8 letters at month 6 (p < 0.0001), 12.7 letters at month 12 (p = 0.0032) and 16.5 letters at month 18 (p = 0.0313). During the follow-up, a total of 17 (59%) patients had a VA improvement of ≥15 letters. Significant central macular thickness decrease was observed with a mean reduction of 159.07 μm at month 6 (p < 0.0001), 181.8 μm at month 12 (p < 0.0001) and 236.17 μm at month 18 (p = 0.0313). No serious adverse events were reported. With a good efficacy and safety, manageable adverse events and an injection rate much lower compared to that of anti-VEGF, this study confirms the use of Ozurdex® for the treatment of persistent DME.

No abstract