ArticleCase reports in ophthalmology
Neovascular Proliferation over a Cosmetic Artificial Iris Implant.
Article in Case reports in ophthalmology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The NewColorIris and BrightOcular implants were initially developed to address congenital iris defects. However, they found application for cosmetic purposes. Unfortunately, these implants are frequently linked to severe complications, including glaucoma, endothelial dysfunction, cataract development, and iris abnormalities. In this context, we present an unusual complication that manifested long after the implantation of the BrightOcular artificial iris. Case Presentation: A 28-year-old woman presented to our emergency room with blurred vision in both eyes. She had undergone bilateral cosmetic iris implantation (BrightOcular, Stellar Devices, New York, NY, USA) 6 years earlier in Tunisia. At the first examination, her best corrected visual acuity was hand motion in the right eye and 20/100 in the left eye, and intraocular pressure (IOP) was 45 mm Hg and 30 mm Hg, respectively. Despite the maximum-tolerated glaucoma medical treatment, the elevated IOP persisted, leading to the decision to perform bilateral sequential Baerveldt glaucoma drainage device implantation. However, she subsequently developed combined central retinal artery and vein occlusion in the right eye and hypotensive maculopathy in the left eye; the latter resolving within 1 month. Two months post-surgery, extensive neovascularization above the implant of the right eye was observed, and this was successfully treated with three sequential injections of bevacizumab. Conclusion: Cosmetic iris implantation is associated with severe, sight-threatening complications. Herein, we describe a previously unreported case of angle neovascularization with new vessels growing over the artificial iris implant. The condition regressed after intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.