Objectives: To evaluate and compare the risk factors, presenting features, and outcomes of patients with culture-positive and culturenegative microbial keratitis (MK) who presented to a tertiary referral center. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of the medical records of 314 patients who were diagnosed with MK in our clinic between 2012 and 2019. Results: Among 314 patients, 142 had positive cultures (45.2%). The mean ages of the culture-positive and -negative patients at the time of diagnosis were 51.39±21.31 (range, 14-90) years and 56.68±21.34 (7-94) years, respectively (p=0.028). The mean best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of the culture-positive and -negative patients were1.74±1.25 (0-3.1) LogMAR and 1.91±1.23 (0-3.1) LogMAR prior to treatment and increased to 1.21±1.30 (0-3.1) LogMAR and 1.27± 1.29 (0-3.1) LogMAR at last visit, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between culture-positive and -negative patients’ BCVA levels at presentation or last visit. Ninety-two patients (64.7%) were infected with bacteria and 50 patients (35.2%) with fungi. The most common pathogen was Pseudomonas aeruginosa (18.3%), followed by Streptococcus pneumoniae (11.2%) and Fusarium spp. (11.2%). Keratitis foci were either centrally or paracentrally located in 105 eyes (73.9%) of culture-positive patients and 149 eyes (86.6%) of culture-negative patients. Multiple foci were present mostly in culture-positive patients (p=0.001). There was no significant difference between the culture-positive and -negative groups in terms of hypopyon presence (p=0.364). The proportion of contact lens (CL) wearers was 33% (n=47) among culturepositive MK patients and 13.3% (n=23) among culture-negative MK patients, respectively (p<0.001). Culture positivity was found to be significantly higher in keratitis associated with CL use (p=0.0001). Conclusion: Microbiological analysis and culture evaluation are important steps in order to manage proper treatment in microbial keratitis. Prognosis mostly depends on the infectivity of the microbiological agent.

No abstract

Aim: To evaluate cornea and corneal biomechanical properties of patients with Fuchs heterochromic iridocylitis. Materials and Methods: Fourteen FHI positive eyes (Group 1) and the contralateral healthy eyes (Group 2) were included. All patients underwent a detailed ophthalmic examination was performed. Also, Ocular Response Analyzer was used to detect corneal biomechanical properties, and specular microscopic evaluation for corneal endothelial cells count was performed. Results: The mean best corrected visual acuity and intraocular pressure were statistically similar. (p values were 0.077 and 0.557, respectively). Corneal biomechanical properties including corneal hysteresis, corneal resistance factor, IOPcc and IOPg were not statistically significant. (p values were 0.521, 0.817, 0.980 and 0.980, respectively). Mean central corneal thickness in Group 1 and 2 were 555.57±42.95 (467-626), 556.5±37.04 (480-623) micrometer, respectively. The difference was not statistically significant (p=0.959). Mean corneal endothelial cell density of Group 1 and Group 2 were 2313±420.22 (1271-2717) and 2404.42±326.75 (1566-2834) cells/mm2, respectively. The difference was not statistically significant (p=0.626). Conclusion: Conflicting with the literature, no differences were detected in corneal biomechanical properties, central corneal thickness and corneal endothelial cell density in Fuchs Heterochromic Iridocyclitis positive eyes. However, more studies with increasing number of patients are still needed.

Objectives: To evaluate changes in the clinical findings of keratoplasty patients who could not be examined face-to-face and were followed up by telephone during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Materials and Methods: Patients with penetrating keratoplasty who presented to the cornea department between March 2020 and February 2021 were grouped according to whether they showed clinical deterioration (Group 1: no deterioration, Group 2: deterioration). The patients' last visit prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and their first visit after the pandemic-related lockdown ended were evaluated. The demographic data, follow-up period, and ophthalmological examination findings of all patients were recorded and the data were compared between the groups. Results: Thirty-five eyes of 35 patients were included in the study. Signs of deterioration were detected in 8 (22.8%) of the patients (Group 1), while no deterioration was detected in 27 (77.2%) of the patients (Group 2). In the last follow-up visit prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, mean best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was 1.26±0.43 LogMAR (range: 0.52-1.80) in Group 1 and 1.41±1.02 LogMAR (range: 0-3.1) in Group 2 (p=0.692). Mean BCVA in the first control during the pandemic was 2.07±0.86 LogMAR (range: 1.3-3.1) in Group 1 and 1.49±1.08 LogMAR (range: 0-3.1) in Group 2 (p=0.08). At the first visit during the COVID-19 pandemic, the mean intraocular pressure of Group 1 was 16.38±8.58 mmHg (range: 0-31), and Group 2 was 17.11±3.7 mmHg (range: 11-26) (p=0.984). Conclusion:The continuation of treatment initiated prior to the pandemic was probably the most important reason why deterioration was not observed in keratoplasty patients. In situations such as pandemics where face-to-face visits with patients may be disrupted, it may be possible to follow the patients safely with telemedicine visits until the difficult circumstances resolve.

Comparison of corneal higher-order aberrations after femtosecond lasik and smile for patients with large scotopic pupil size