Purpose: To report a rare case of severe ocular hypertension following intravenous methylprednisolone treatment in a child with bilateral optic neuritis.Case summary: A 6-year-old girl presented with bilateral severe visual loss and disc swelling. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed optic nerve enhancement, and she received high-dose intravenous methylprednisolone for 3 days and oral prednisolone 30 mg/day for 2 weeks. Two weeks after initiating treatment, ophthalmologic examination revealed an intraocular pressure (IOP) of 46 mmHg in the right eye and 42 mmHg in the left eye. The best-corrected visual acuity was 1.0 in the right eye and 0.6 in the left eye. Relative afferent pupillary defect was noted in the left eye. Fundus examination showed normal cup-to-disc ratio (0.4) in both eyes. The iridocorneal angle was open in all directions. The treatment plan included the cessation of oral prednisolone and initiation of latanoprost and dorzolamide-timolol fixed combination agent. After 12 hours, the IOP decreased to 18 mmHg in the right eye and 14 mmHg in the left eye. Six months later, her visual acuity was 1.0 in both eyes, and IOP was maintained at 11 and 13 mmHg in the right and left eye, respectively. Optic disc examination showed no sign of glaucomatous change with normal cup-to disc ratio in both eyes. Conclusions Since steroid medication may cause asymptomatic IOP elevation, regular intraocular pressure measurements are required during steroid treatment for pediatric optic neuritis. The administration of IOP-lowering eyedrops returned IOP to the normal range without damaging the optic nerve.

Purpose: To report the effect of removal of a central descemet membrane on the endothelial function, morphology, and clinical symptoms of eyes with Fuch’s endothelial dystrophy. Methods: From August 2019 to January 2021, patients with Fuch’s endothelial dystrophy, i.e., with confluent, central corneal guttae and cataracts that required surgery, underwent phacoemulsification, intraocular lens implantation, and central descemet membrane stripping. To evaluate the effect of descemet stripping only (DSO), visual acuity and intraocular pressure were measured, and corneal pachymetry, slit-lamp and specular microscopy, and anterior segment optical coherence tomography performed, before surgery and at 1, 7, and 30 days and 3 and 6 months after surgery. Results: Seven patients (10 eyes) were included. Visual acuity improved from 1.01 ± 0.40 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) preoperatively to 0.33 ± 0.22 logMAR 6 months after surgery (p = 0.008). The mean central corneal thickness decreased from 578.50 ± 36.88 μm preoperatively to 568.50 ± 48.61 μm 6 months after surgery; the difference was not significant (p = 0.507). The endothelial cell count increased significantly from 663.80 ± 356.40/mm2 preoperatively to 1,082.00 ± 274.46/mm2 6 months after surgery (p = 0.043). Conclusions DSO can serve as a useful alternative when corneal transplantation is not possible in patients with Fuch’s endothelial dystrophy, but treatment efficacy and safety require further evaluation.

Purpose: We report on three patients who received 0.625% povidone-iodine (PVI) intravitreal injections to treat endophthalmitis that did not respond to conventional antibiotic treatment or were inoperable.Case summary: Case 1 was a 42-year-old female with suspected left-eye endophthalmitis that developed after anterior chamber irrigation to treat silicone oil emulsification. A 0.625% PVI intravitreal injection reduced inflammation of the anterior chamber and the vitreous. Case 2 was an 84-year-old male who was blind in the left eye due to glaucoma. He was diagnosed with endogenous endophthalmitis on the basis of the anterior chamber hypopyon and vitreous inflammation. After 0.625% PVI intravitreal injection, the endophthalmitis resolved without any recurrence. Case 3 was a 49-year-old female with suspected endogenous left-eye endophthalmitis attributable to a liver abscess. Despite intravitreal antibiotic injections, the inflammation worsened. A 0.625% PVI intravitreal injection improved both the anterior chamber and vitreous inflammation. Conclusions Intravitreal 0.625% PVI injection is a useful option when a patient with endophthalmitis is likely to not recover full vision, when surgery cannot be performed, and when there is no response to empirical antibiotics.

Purpose: We report on three patients who received 0.625% povidone-iodine (PVI) intravitreal injections to treat endophthalmitis that did not respond to conventional antibiotic treatment or were inoperable.Case summary: Case 1 was a 42-year-old female with suspected left-eye endophthalmitis that developed after anterior chamber irrigation to treat silicone oil emulsification. A 0.625% PVI intravitreal injection reduced inflammation of the anterior chamber and the vitreous. Case 2 was an 84-year-old male who was blind in the left eye due to glaucoma. He was diagnosed with endogenous endophthalmitis on the basis of the anterior chamber hypopyon and vitreous inflammation. After 0.625% PVI intravitreal injection, the endophthalmitis resolved without any recurrence. Case 3 was a 49-year-old female with suspected endogenous left-eye endophthalmitis attributable to a liver abscess. Despite intravitreal antibiotic injections, the inflammation worsened. A 0.625% PVI intravitreal injection improved both the anterior chamber and vitreous inflammation. Conclusions Intravitreal 0.625% PVI injection is a useful option when a patient with endophthalmitis is likely to not recover full vision, when surgery cannot be performed, and when there is no response to empirical antibiotics.

Purpose: We report on three patients who received 0.625% povidone-iodine (PVI) intravitreal injections to treat endophthalmitis that did not respond to conventional antibiotic treatment or were inoperable.Case summary: Case 1 was a 42-year-old female with suspected left-eye endophthalmitis that developed after anterior chamber irrigation to treat silicone oil emulsification. A 0.625% PVI intravitreal injection reduced inflammation of the anterior chamber and the vitreous. Case 2 was an 84-year-old male who was blind in the left eye due to glaucoma. He was diagnosed with endogenous endophthalmitis on the basis of the anterior chamber hypopyon and vitreous inflammation. After 0.625% PVI intravitreal injection, the endophthalmitis resolved without any recurrence. Case 3 was a 49-year-old female with suspected endogenous left-eye endophthalmitis attributable to a liver abscess. Despite intravitreal antibiotic injections, the inflammation worsened. A 0.625% PVI intravitreal injection improved both the anterior chamber and vitreous inflammation. Conclusions Intravitreal 0.625% PVI injection is a useful option when a patient with endophthalmitis is likely to not recover full vision, when surgery cannot be performed, and when there is no response to empirical antibiotics.

Purpose: We report on three patients who received 0.625% povidone-iodine (PVI) intravitreal injections to treat endophthalmitis that did not respond to conventional antibiotic treatment or were inoperable.Case summary: Case 1 was a 42-year-old female with suspected left-eye endophthalmitis that developed after anterior chamber irrigation to treat silicone oil emulsification. A 0.625% PVI intravitreal injection reduced inflammation of the anterior chamber and the vitreous. Case 2 was an 84-year-old male who was blind in the left eye due to glaucoma. He was diagnosed with endogenous endophthalmitis on the basis of the anterior chamber hypopyon and vitreous inflammation. After 0.625% PVI intravitreal injection, the endophthalmitis resolved without any recurrence. Case 3 was a 49-year-old female with suspected endogenous left-eye endophthalmitis attributable to a liver abscess. Despite intravitreal antibiotic injections, the inflammation worsened. A 0.625% PVI intravitreal injection improved both the anterior chamber and vitreous inflammation. Conclusions Intravitreal 0.625% PVI injection is a useful option when a patient with endophthalmitis is likely to not recover full vision, when surgery cannot be performed, and when there is no response to empirical antibiotics.