Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Case report
Transient choroidal detachment after ultrasonic circular cyclocoagulation
  1. Tiago Morais Sarmento,
  2. Ricardo Figueiredo,
  3. João Garrido and
  4. Ana Luisa Rebelo
  1. Department of Ophthalmology, Hospital do Espírito Santo EPE, Evora, Portugal
  1. Correspondence to Dr Tiago Morais Sarmento; tiagomsarmento{at}edu.ulisboa.pt

Abstract

Two patients with refractory glaucoma followed in our ophthalmology department registered progression on left eyes (OS) despite best practice. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was 9/10 and 8/10 and intraocular pressure (IOP) was above 20 mm Hg while under maximal hypotensive therapy. The procedure was performed under retrobulbar anaesthesia with second-generation EyeOp1probes. In follow-up, OS were hypotonic with registered IOP ≤5 mm Hg and revealed a 3/10 BCVA. The funduscopy showed one temporal and superior and another nasal and temporal choroidal detachments. The patients started oral steroids and interrupted all ocular hypotensive medication. After therapy, patients returned with normal rising OS IOPs and with totally reapplied choroids, accompanied by normalised BCVA. These two cases are proof of the possibility of transient choroidal detachment after a ultrasonic circular cyclocoagulation. While a very rare major vision-threatening complication, every ophthalmologist should remind it when sudden BCVA reductions occur after this procedure.

  • ophthalmology
  • glaucoma
View Full Text

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Contributors TMS and ALR was involved in the patient management and conception. TMS contributed to the data collection. TMS, RF and JG contributed to the design, editing and drafting paper. ALR contributed to the paper revision. All authors contributed to the approval of final script.

  • 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.

  • Patient consent for publication Obtained.

  • Ethics approval This publication was approved by the Ethics Committee of HESE.

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

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.