|
A consumer reported that following an intraocular lens (iol) implant procedure the patient was complaining of cloudy, double images, halo and constant haze and difficulty seeing out of that left eye.However, patient was complaining of decreased vision, had postop spike in pressure, on carbonic anhydrase inhibitors (cais) three times a day and ophthalmic corticosteroid (topical steroid) four times a day to that left eye.Vision was 20/150 in the left eye.Pinhole in that left eye was 20/100 2.Re pinholed him and found him to be a poor 20/30 3 in that eye.Conjunctiva white, cornea clear; anterior chamber (ac) deep and clear; 1+ to 2+ ns right eye, vitreous clear in the right eye.Pupil was not dilated upon the patient's request.Left eye revealed the cornea clearly.Ac deep and clear, picol present, some cortical material was in the peripheral portion of the capsule anterior of the capsule from the 8 to 11.The capsule was intact with a minimal haze.Contact lenses were used.There was a slight haze even with my contact lens to view the fovea of the left eye.Oct findings were felt to be insignificant except for vitreomacular adhesions seen in both eyes.Ellipsoid layer normal both eyes.Dilated fundus, scleral depression, contact lens left eye, normal appearing nerve.Macula on peripheral exam revealed laser to retinal hole in the supertemporal quadrant of that left eye.The rest of periphery was unremarkable.No evidence of cme.No evidence of epiretinal membrane.At the present time, his decreased vision based upon my findings could be the implant itself and/or the slight haze to the posterior capsule.Again, the retina is fine, no evidence of edema or other significant abnormalities causing his left eye.Consideration for iol exchange and/or yag of the posterior capsule depending if patient has significant rotation or if the rotation was different from what they can tell on the lensometer; however, the good news was the retina intact.Patient had no significant pathology to account for decreased vision that reported other than the implant or posterior capsule.The patient had seen surgeon and referred to someone within the practice who stated that it could be the lens.Nothing appeared to be wrong on exam.Patient would see the surgeon again in a few weeks.Additional information has been requested but is not available at the time of this report.
|