Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Case report
Refractory recurrent ocular graft versus host disease
  1. Emily Greenan1,2,
  2. Elisabeth Vandenberghe3 and
  3. Conor C Murphy1,2
  1. 1 Ophthalmology, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland
  2. 2 Ophthalmology, Royal Victoria Eye and Ear Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
  3. 3 St James's Hospital and Trinity College, Dublin 8, Ireland
  1. Correspondence to Professor Conor C Murphy; conorcmurphy{at}


Ocular graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is one of the most frequent and long-term complications affecting patients after haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. It is associated with significant morbidity and a marked reduction in quality of life. Although common, currently there are no widely accepted guidelines available for its management, and no suggested regime of treatment that is completely satisfactory. So far, prophylactic treatment strategies for ocular GVHD have yet to be developed and treatment is normally initiated based on symptoms often after permanent ocular tissue changes and surface damage has occurred. Here we describe a case of recurrent ocular GVHD and its associated complications that was highly refractory to treatment.

  • anterior chamber
  • eye
  • haematology (incl blood transfusion)
  • malignant and benign haematology

Statistics from

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.


  • Twitter @OcularOirg

  • Contributors EG is a clinical ophthalmologist who was involved in the care of the patient and is first author of this paper having researched and written the majority of the content. EV was the treating haematologist in this case and who we worked in conjunction with to treat this difficult case of ocular GVHD. She has approved this edited version of the manuscript. CCM is second, being the overseeing consultant involved in the medical decisions pertaining the patients care, as well as providing direction, advice to the author and helping to edit the paper.

  • 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.

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