BACKGROUNDAutoimmune bullous dermatoses are complex diseases triggered by autoantibodies action against epidermal antigens or the dermoepidermal junction. Blisters and vesicles that evolve with erosion areas characterize them. Although rare, they present high morbidity, affecting the quality of life of patients.OBJECTIVESTo assess the magnitude of autoimmune bullous dermatoses on life quality of patients treated in a public university service in countryside of Brazil.METHODSThis cross-sectional study was based on an inquiry with autoimmune bullous dermatoses patients assisted at outpatient university referral service. Elements related to quality of life were evaluated by the Dermatology Life Quality Index, as well as clinical and demographic data.RESULTSThe study evaluated 43 patients with pemphigus foliaceus, 32 with pemphigus vulgaris, 6 with bullous pemphigoid and 3 with dermatitis herpetiformis. The average age was 48 ± 16 years and 34 (40%) were female. The median score (p25-p75) of the Dermatology Life Quality Index was 16 (9-19), classified as "severe impairment" of life quality, in which the greater impact was related to symptoms and feelings, daily and leisure activities.CONCLUSIONSAutoimmune bullous dermatoses inflict severe impairment of quality of life for patients followed by a public outpatient clinic in the countryside of Brazil.

Monotherapy laser photocoagulation for diabetic macular oedema.

Integrated versus non-integrated orbital implants for treating anophthalmic sockets.

We report the case of a 4-year-old boy with Marfan syndrome whose parents reported he had had low visual acuity since birth. On examination, there was microspherophakia and a small subluxation of the lens. The objective refraction was-23.75-2.75 x 70 in the right eye and-25.50-3.50 x 90 in the left eye. Since the microspherophakia and the high myopia severely affected the boy's quality of life, clear lens extraction, anterior vitrectomy, posterior surgical capsulotomy via the pars plana, and intraocular lens implantation were performed. Two years postoperatively, the patient had centered intraocular lenses and a corrected visual acuity of 20/30 in both eyes. The child was satisfied with his vision and was able to study and perform daily activities without visual limitations.

Lacrimal probing is the treatment of choice for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction that does not have a spontaneous resolution; however, there is no consensus about the best time for probing and if it is superior to other therapies. The present study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of lacrimal probing compared with other treatments/no intervention to treat congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Methods: A systematic review of literature in PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, clinicaltrials. gov, and LILACS databases up to December 2019 was performed. Randomized clinical trials that enrolled children diagnosed with congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction and undergoing lacrimal probing were considered. Data extraction and a risk of bias assessment were conducted independently and in duplicate. The overall quality of evidence for each outcome was conducted using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation classification system. Results: Four randomized clinical trials involving 423 participants were eligible. No statistically significant differences were observed in resolution rates between early probing and observation/late probing (two studies; risk ratio 1.00 [95% confidence interval 0.76-1.33]; p=0.99; low certainty evidence). One study reported better resolution rates with bicanalicular silicone stent intubation compared with late probing in the complex congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction cases subgroup (risk ratio 0.56 [95% confidence interval 0.34-0.92]; p=0.02; moderate certainty evidence). Conclusions: Low certainty evidence suggests that early probing has the same success rate as late probing. Evidence of moderate certainty suggests that late probing has a lower success rate than bicanalicular silastic intubation in patients with complex congenital nasolacrimal duct obstructione.