You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Case report
Maternal finger-prick allogenic blood for persistent corneal epithelial defects
  1. Rathin Pujari1,
  2. Rashmi Deshmukh1,
  3. Chirag Sheth1 and
  4. Madhavan S Rajan1,2
  1. 1Department of Ophthalmology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
  2. 2Vision and Eye Research Institute, Anglia Ruskin University, Chelmsford, Essex, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Rathin Pujari; rp493{at}cam.ac.uk

Abstract

This is a case of a 17-year-old patient with aniridia-related keratopathy and persistent epithelial defect (PED) treated successfully using maternal finger-prick blood (FPB). Maternal allogenic FPB treatment was initiated to the patient who was non-compliant with the use of autologous FPB. The PED was successfully managed with maternal FPB treatment with rapid and complete closure of the epithelial defect. Additionally, there was immediate and sustained symptomatic improvement to pain and recovery of vision in the only seeing eye. There was no immunological reaction to allogenic blood. Maternal finger-prick allogenic blood could serve as a potential alternative to serum eye drops or autologous FPB in the management of refractory PED, particularly in reference to the paediatric or the vulnerable age group. Further studies are required to confirm the role of allogenic blood in the treatment of PED.

  • anterior chamber
  • haematology (incl blood transfusion)
  • paediatrics

https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2020-241138

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors RP, RD, CS and MSR have all made substantial contributions to conception, design and interpretation of the data for the case. RP, RD, CS and MSR have all made substantial contributions to the manuscript and given their final approval to the publication. RP, RD, CS and MSR were all part of the treatment team that saw the patient. They discussed and agreed upon the plan of treatment. During the write up of the manuscript, RP, RD and CS wrote significant parts of the manuscript, with MSR having oversight of all components and making the final corrections.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.