Risk of New Retinal Vascular Occlusion After mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination Within Aggregated Electronic Health Record Data

Ocular Manifestations of COVID-19

There is an increasing body of knowledge regarding how COVID-19 may be associated with ocular disease of varying severity and duration. This article discusses the literature on the ocular manifestations associated with COVID-19, including appraisal of the current evidence, suggested mechanisms of action, associated comorbidities and risk factors, timing from initial infection to diagnosis and clinical red flags. The current literature primarily comprises case reports and case series which inevitably lack control groups and evidence to support causality. However, these early data have prompted the development of larger population-based and laboratory studies that are emerging. As new data become available, a better appraisal of the true effects of COVID-19 on the eye will be possible. While the COVID-19 pandemic was officially declared no longer a "global health emergency" by the World Health Organization (WHO) in May 2023, case numbers continue to rise. Reinfection with different variants is predicted to lead to a growing cumulative burden of disease, particularly as more chronic, multi-organ sequelae become apparent with potentially significant ocular implications. COVID-19 ocular manifestations are postulated to be due to three main mechanisms: firstly, there is a dysregulated immune response to the initial infection linked to inflammatory eye disease; secondly, patients with COVID-19 have a greater tendency towards a hypercoagulable state, leading to prothrombotic events; thirdly, patients with severe COVID-19 requiring hospitalisation and are immunosuppressed due to administered corticosteroids or comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus are at an increased risk of secondary infections, including endophthalmitis and rhino-orbital-mucormycosis. Reported ophthalmic associations with COVID-19, therefore, include a range of conditions such as conjunctivitis, scleritis, uveitis, endogenous endophthalmitis, corneal graft rejection, retinal artery and vein occlusion, non-arteritic ischaemic optic neuropathy, glaucoma, neurological and orbital sequelae. With the need to consider telemedicine consultation in view of COVID-19's infectivity, understanding the range of ocular conditions that may present during or following infection is essential to ensure patients are appropriately triaged, with prompt in-person ocular examination for management of potentially sight-threatening and life-threatening diseases.

Cardiovascular risk in anti-VEGF treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration

OBJECTIVE

Assess 5-year all-cause mortality (ACM), hemorrhagic stroke, ischemic stroke, and myocardial infarction (MI) risks in nAMD patients receiving anti-VEGF injections compared with controls.

DESIGN

Population-based retrospective cohort study using a U.S. federated health research network, containing de-identified data of 96 million patients from 1/1/2003 to 3/6/2023.

PARTICIPANTS

nAMD Patients with anti-VEGF injections. Controls included nAMD patients without anti-VEGF injections, non-exudative AMD patients, and patients without AMD.

METHODS

Patients were identified using nAMD ICD-10 and anti-VEGF CPT codes and matched for age, sex, and comorbidities. Five-year relative risk of ACM (RR1), hemorrhagic stroke (RR2), ischemic stroke (RR3), and MI (RR4) in nAMD patients receiving anti-VEGF injections were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 27,609 nAMD patients (mean diagnosis age [SD], [78.2 (10.3)]) received anti-VEGF injections; 769 nAMD patients without injections (75.8 [12.2]), 27,599 non-exudative AMD patients (78.2 [10.3]), and 21,902 no-AMD patients (76.1 [10.5]) were identified. After matching, nAMD patients receiving injections did not show increased risk versus nAMD patients without injections (RR1, 0.66; 95% CI [0.53, 0.82]), (RR2, 1.00 [0.42, 2.38]), (RR3, 1.70 [0.92,3.13]), (RR4, 0.63 [0.33, 1.18]). No increased risk was found compared to non-exudative AMD patients (RR1, 0.99 [0.95, 1.03]), (RR2, 0.94 [0.83,1.07]), (RR3, 1.04 [0.96, 1.12]), (RR4, 0.99 [0.91, 1.08]). Increased risk for ACM was observed versus no-AMD patients (RR1, 1.21 [1.15, 1.27]), but no other differences were found (RR2, 0.81 [0.70, 0.93]), (RR3, 1.00 [0.92, 1.09]), (RR4, 0.986 [0.90, 1.09]).

CONCLUSION

Anti-VEGF injections were not associated with major cardiovascular events in nAMD patients over 5 years.

Ischemic and Inflammatory Ocular Adverse Events Following Different Types of Vaccination for COVID-19 and Their Incidence Analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the ocular adverse event (OAE) and the incidence rate that can occur after the COVID-19 vaccination.

METHODS

Patients who visited with an ophthalmologic diagnosis within a month of COVID-19 vaccination were retrospectively analyzed. OAEs were categorized as ischemia and inflammation by their presumed pathogenesis and were compared by types of vaccine: messenger RNA (mRNA) and viral vector vaccine. The crude incidence rate was calculated using data from the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients with OAEs after COVID-19 vaccination were reviewed: 10 patients after mRNA and 14 after viral vector vaccine. Retinal vein occlusion (nine patients) and paralytic strabismus (four patients) were the leading diagnoses. Ischemic OAE was likely to occur after viral vector vaccines, while inflammatory OAE was closely related to mRNA vaccine (p = 0.017). The overall incidence rate of OAE was 5.8 cases per million doses: 11.5 per million doses in viral vector vaccine and 3.4 per million doses in mRNA vaccine.

CONCLUSIONS

OAEs can be observed shortly after the COVID-19 vaccination, and their category was different based on the types of vaccine. The information and incidence of OAE based on the type of vaccine can help monitor patients who were administered the COVID-19 vaccine.

Risk of abducens nerve palsy following COVID-19 vaccination

PURPOSE

To investigate the prevalence and risk of new-onset abducens nerve palsy and acute-onset diplopia following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

METHODS

In this retrospective, population-based study, patient data from the COVID-19 Research Network of TriNetX was searched via the TriNetX Analytics platform for patients who received specific vaccinations based on Common Procedural Technology codes. We recorded instances of newly diagnosed abducens nerve palsy and diplopia within 21 days following each vaccination event.

RESULTS

Of the 3,545,224 patients (mean age at vaccination, 46.2 ± 21.3 years) who received the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, 12 (<0.0001%) patients had a new diagnosis of abducens nerve palsy and 453 (0.013%) had acute-onset diplopia within 21 days of first dose of COVID-19 vaccination. After propensity score matching, the relative risk for new abducens nerve palsy diagnosis after the first dose of COVID-19 vaccination was not significantly different from that after influenza (RR, 0.77), Tdap (RR, 1.0), or the second dose of the COVID-19 vaccinations (RR, 1.00). Furthermore, there was a lower risk of abducens nerve palsy diagnosis after the first dose of the COVID-19 vaccination compared with the risk after COVID-19 infection (RR, 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of a new abducens nerve palsy diagnosis following the first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine is lower than the risk associated with COVID-19 infection itself. There is no evidence to suggest a causal relationship between COVID-19 vaccination and the development of abducens nerve palsy.

Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol and Statin Usage Are Associated With Rates of Pseudarthrosis Following Single-Level Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the relationships of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and statin usage with pseudarthrosis following single-level posterior or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF/TLIF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Hypercholesterolemia can lead to atherosclerosis of the segmental arteries, which branch into vertebral bone through intervertebral foramina. According to the vascular hypothesis of disc disease, this can lead to ischemia of the lumbar discs and contribute to lumbar degenerative disease. Yet, little has been reported regarding the effects of cholesterol and statins on the outcomes of lumbar fusion surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

TriNetX, a global federated research network, was retrospectively queried to identify 52,140 PLIF/TLIF patients between 2002 and 2021. Of these patients, 2137 had high cholesterol (≥130 mg/dL) and 906 had low cholesterol (≤55 mg/dL). Perioperatively, 18,275 patients used statins, while 33,415 patients did not. One-to-one propensity score matching for age, sex, race, and comorbidities was conducted to balance the analyzed cohorts. The incidence of pseudarthrosis was then assessed in the matched cohorts within the six-month, one-year, and two-year postoperative periods.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, high-cholesterol patients had greater odds of developing pseudarthrosis six months [odds ratio (OR): 1.73, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.28-2.33], one year (OR: 1.59, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.20-2.10), and two years (OR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.20-2.05) following a PLIF/TLIF procedure. Patients with statin usage had significantly lower odds of developing pseudarthrosis six months (OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.69-0.79), one year (OR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.71-0.81), and two years (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.72-0.81) following single-level PLIF/TLIF.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that patients with hypercholesterolemia have an increased risk of developing pseudarthrosis following PLIF/TLIF while statin use is associated with a decreased risk. The data presented may underscore an overlooked opportunity for perioperative optimization in lumbar fusion patients, warranting further investigation in this area.

Retinal Artery and Vein Occlusion Risks after Coronavirus Disease 2019 or Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination

PURPOSE

To evaluate the incidence of new retinal artery occlusion (RAO) and retinal vein occlusion (RVO) after the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) or vaccination against COVID-19 and compare the incidences with the population with neither.

DESIGN

Nationwide population-based cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

From a nationwide population-based cohort, 8 418 590 patients were categorized into control (group 1), COVID-19 infection (group 2), and COVID-19 vaccination (group 3) groups.

METHODS

The cumulative incidence of RAO and RVO was calculated in groups 1, 2, and 3 using the Kaplan-Meier method. We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) based on the Poisson distribution for RAO and RVO according to each group and subgroup using Cox proportional hazards models, with group 1 as the reference. We conducted univariable and multivariable analyses for the risk factors of RAO and RVO according to each subgroup.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Cumulative incidence and risks of incidence of RAO and RVO from the index date to day 60.

RESULTS

In multivariable analysis, no significant increase in RAO and RVO risks after COVID-19 or COVID-19 vaccination were observed in either men or women. These results were observed consistently across various conditions in sensitivity analyses. In subgroup analysis, individuals who were vaccinated before infection showed no significant increase in RAO or RVO risks in both sexes compared with the control group. In the subgroup analysis of vaccinated patients, the HRs of RAO and RVO for different vaccine types did not show an increase compared with the control group; however, an exception was observed in women who received mRNA-1273 vaccines, who showed a higher RAO HR (4.65; 95% CI, 1.27-17.03; P = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

Within 60 days of COVID-19 diagnosis or vaccination, RAO and RVO occurred rarely. We observed no increase in the HR of RVO and RAO relative to COVID-19 or COVID-19 vaccination except for a possible increase in the RAO HR in women who received mRNA-1273, for which the raw incidence was extremely low. Further investigation is required to validate this result.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)

The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

The Risk of Optic Neuritis following mRNA Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination Compared to Coronavirus Disease 2019 Infection and Other Vaccinations

PURPOSE

To determine the risk of optic neuritis (ON) after mRNA Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine administration.

DESIGN

U.S. National aggregate database retrospective cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients were placed into cohorts based on mRNA COVID-19 vaccination status (no vaccine and positive history of COVID-19 infection, 1 vaccine, or 2 vaccines received) from December 2020 to June 2022. Two control cohorts were created with patients vaccinated against influenza or tetanus diphtheria and pertussis (Tdap) from June 2018 to December 2019. Patients with any history of ON or significant risk factors for ON development including infectious, inflammatory, and neoplastic diseases were excluded.

METHODS

A large deidentified database was queried for the Common Procedural Technology codes for immunization encounters specific to first dose and second dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, influenza, or Tdap. Cohorts were 1:1 propensity score matched on age, sex, race, and ethnicity. The risk of ON development after vaccination was calculated and compared for all 5 cohorts with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) reported.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Risk ratio (RR) of ON 21 days after vaccination (or COVID-19 infection) and incidence of ON per 100 000 individuals.

RESULTS

After matching, the first dose COVID-19 and influenza vaccine cohorts (n = 1 678 598, mean age [standard deviation] at vaccination of 45.5 [23.3] years and 43.2 [25.5] years, 55% female) the RR of developing ON was 0.44 (95% CI, 0.28-0.80). The first dose of COVID-19 and Tdap vaccinations (n = 797 538, mean age 38.9 [20.0] years, 54.2% female) cohort had 10 and 16 patients develop ON (RR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.28-1.38). Comparison of COVID-19-vaccinated patients (n = 3 698 848, 48.2 [21.5] years, 54.7% female) to unvaccinated and COVID-19-infected patients (n = 3 698 848, 49.6 [22.0] years, 55.2% female) showed 49 and 506 patients developing ON, respectively (RR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.07-0.12). The incidence per 100 000 for ON was 1 in the first dose COVID-19 vaccine cohort, 2 in the influenza cohort, and 2 in the Tdap cohort, and 14 in the COVID-19-infected and unvaccinated cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk of ON after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination is rare and comparable to Tdap vaccination, decreased compared with influenza vaccination, and decreased compared with COVID-19 infection in the absence of vaccination.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Assessing the Association Between Head and Neck Cancer and Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis

Objective: To determine the odds of head and neck cancer (HNC) in patients with a concurrent or prior diagnosis of granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA). Methods and Materials: The TriNetX Analytics Network, a federated research platform that aggregates de-identified electronic health record data of over 130 million patients worldwide, was queried for patients with at least one ICD-10 encounter diagnosis of GPA. Patients within this group with an encounter diagnosis of cancer of the sinonasal, oral cavity, oropharynx, nasopharynx, and larynx concurrent or after the initial encounter diagnosis of GPA were recorded and compared to a standardized control population to determine odds ratios with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Relevant confounding variables, including human papillomavirus, Epstein Barr virus, tobacco, and alcohol exposure, were balanced between cohorts by 1:1 propensity matching. Results: Of the patients in the GPA cohort, 126 (0.48%) had an ICD-10 diagnosis of HNC. When stratifying by head and neck subsites, 20 (0.08%), 18 (0.07%), 23 (0.09%), 70 (0.27%), and 22 (0.084%) GPA patients had an ICD-10 encounter diagnosis of cancer involving the sinonasal, nasopharynx, larynx, oral cavity, and oropharynx. When comparing the experimental GPA group with the standardized control population after matching, patients in the GPA group had 1.3 times (95% CI: 1.03-1.175) greater odds of HNC when including cases diagnosed after or concurrently with the diagnosis of the vasculitis. There was no statistical difference in the odds of cancer at each anatomical subsite between the GPA and control cohort after matching. Conclusion: Our study identifies a statistically significant increase in the odds of HNC encounter diagnoses in patients with GPA.

Association between nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir and the outcomes of non-hospitalized obese patients with COVID-19

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir (NMV-r) and the outcomes of non-hospitalized obese patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used the TriNetX research network to identify non-hospitalized obese adult patients with COVID-19 between 1 January 2022 and 30 June 2023. Propensity score matching was used to match patients receiving NMV-r (NMV-r group) with those not receiving NMV-r (control group). The primary outcome was the compositive outcome of all-cause emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalization or death during the 30-day follow-up period.

RESULTS

Using propensity score matching methods, two cohorts of 30,969 patients each with balanced baseline characteristics were identified. During the follow-up period, the NMV-r group had a lower risk of all-cause ED visits, hospitalization or death [4.80% (n=1489) vs 5.50% (n=1705); hazard ratio (HR) 0.900, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.839-0.965]. Compared with the control group, the NMV-r group had a lower risk of all-cause ED visits (HR 0.812, 95% CI 0.740-0.891) and all-cause mortality (HR 0.089, 95% CI 0.027-0.288). The lower risk in the NMV-r group compared with the control group was observed consistently in most subgroup analyses according to body mass index (30.0-34.9 kg/m2: HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.55-0.82; 35.0-39.9 kg/m2: HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.52-0.87), age (4-64 years: HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.75-0.92; ≥65 years: HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79-0.98), sex (men: HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.60-0.79; women: HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.63-0.76) and vaccination status (unvaccinated: HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.70-0.81).

CONCLUSION

NMV-r is associated with reduced risk of all-cause ED visits, hospitalization and death for non-hospitalized obese patients with COVID-19. Accordingly, these findings support the use of NMV-r in obese patients.

Risk of Stroke, Myocardial Infarction, and Death After Retinal Artery Occlusion

Importance

Patients with retinal artery occlusions (RAOs) are recommended to have emergent stroke workup, although the true risk of death and subsequent vascular events post-RAO is not clear.

Objective

To determine short-term and long-term rates of stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and death in patients after RAO compared with a control cohort.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study used aggregated electronic health records from January 1, 2003, through April 14, 2023, from TriNetX, a network with data from more than 111 million patients. Patients with RAO and a cataract control group were identified and matched for age, sex, race, and comorbidities, including hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and smoking status. Patients were excluded if they had a stroke or MI within 2 years before the diagnosis of RAO or cataract.

Exposure

International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision, diagnosis code for RAO or age-related cataract.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Rate of death, stroke, and MI at 2 weeks, 30 days, 1 year, 5 years, and 10 years after RAO compared with matched controls.

Results

There were a total of 34 874 patients with at least 1 year of follow-up in the RAO cohort. The mean (SD) age at the RAO event was 66 (15.2) years. The rate of death after RAO diagnosis was higher than after cataract diagnosis at 2 weeks (0.14% vs 0.06%; relative risk [RR], 2.45; 95% CI, 1.46-4.12; risk difference [RD], 0.08%; 95% CI, 0.04%-0.13%; P < .001), 30 days (0.29% vs 0.14%; RR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.49-2.97; RD, 0.15%; 95% CI, 0.08%-0.22%; P < .001), 1 year (3.51% vs 1.99%; RR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.61-1.94; RD, 1.41%; 95% CI, 1.17%-1.66%; P < .001), 5 years (22.74% vs 17.82%; RR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.23-1.33; RD, 4.93%; 95% CI, 4.17%-5.68%; P < .001), and 10 years (57.86% vs 55.38%; RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.07; RD, 2.47%; 95% CI, 1.25%-3.69%; P < .001). Risk of stroke after RAO was higher at 2 weeks (1.72% vs 0.08%; RR, 21.43; 95% CI, 14.67-31.29; RD, 1.64%; 95% CI, 1.50%-1.78%; P < .001), 30 days (2.48% vs 0.18%; RR, 14.18; 95% CI, 10.94-18.48; RD, 2.31%; 95% CI, 2.14%-2.47%; P < .001), 1 year (5.89% vs 1.13%; RR, 5.20; 95% CI, 4.67-5.79; RD, 4.64%; 95% CI, 4.37%-4.91%; P < .001), 5 years (10.85% vs 4.86%; RR, 2.24; 95% CI, 2.09-2.40; RD, 6.00%; 95% CI, 5.50%-6.50%; P < .001), and 10 years (14.59% vs 9.18%; RR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.48-1.70; RD, 5.41%; 95% CI, 4.62%-6.21%; P < .001). Risk of MI after RAO was higher at 2 weeks (0.16% vs 0.06%; RR, 3.00; 95% CI, 1.79-5.04; RD, 0.11%; 95% CI, 0.06%-0.16%; P < .001), 30 days (0.27% vs 0.10%; RR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.78-3.83; RD, 0.17%; 95% CI, 0.10%-0.23%; P < .001), 1 year (1.66% vs 0.97%; RR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.51-1.97; RD, 0.59%; 95% CI, 0.42%-0.76%; P < .001), 5 years (6.06% vs 5.00%; RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.12-1.31; RD, 1.07%; 95% CI, 0.64%-1.50%; P < .001), and 10 years (10.55% vs 9.43%; RR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.04-1.21; RD, 1.13%; 95% CI, 0.39%-1.87%; P = .003).

Conclusions and Relevance

This study showed an increased risk of death, stroke, and MI in patients with RAO at both short-term and long-term intervals after RAO compared with a matched control population diagnosed with cataract. These findings suggest a potential need for multidisciplinary evaluation and long-term systemic follow-up of patients post-RAO.

Case Report: Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion Post-mRNA SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) Vaccination

SIGNIFICANCE

Systemic thromboembolic complications are well documented to be associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, there have been a growing number of reports regarding ocular complications stemming from COVID-19 vaccinations. This case illustrates a clear temporal and possible causal relationship of COVID-19 vaccination with an ocular microvascular disorder, namely, retinal vein occlusion.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to report a case of inferotemporal branch retinal vein occlusion after messenger RNA Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination.

CASE REPORT

A middle-aged woman developed right eye central scotoma 2 days after COVID-19 vaccination. She had transient hypertension during the first 2 days post-vaccination. A decrease in visual acuity (6/18) was documented. Initial retinal findings included flame-shaped hemorrhages and cotton-wool spots along inferotemporal branch retinal vessels. Optical coherence tomography revealed right eye cystoid macular edema. Laboratory investigation revealed mildly raised erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein. Other systemic examinations were unremarkable. She was treated for right eye inferotemporal branch retinal vein occlusion with cystoid macular edema and was given intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor monthly in three doses. Her visual acuity improved to 6/6 with resolved cystoid macular edema.

CONCLUSIONS

This case illustrates a clear temporal and possible causal relationship between COVID-19 vaccination and retinal vein occlusion. Post-vaccination transient hypertension or the immunological and inflammatory response to the vaccine may have contributed to the venous occlusive event in this case. Eye care providers should remain aware of this possibility. The effectiveness of intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for the treatment of macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion was demonstrated in this patient.

Retinal Vein Occlusion Amongst People Vaccinated by mRNA- and Viral Vector- COVID-19 Vaccines: A Systematic Review

Vaccines are highly effective in lowering the mortality due to COVID-19. Although several suspected adverse events or side effects after vaccination including retinal vein occlusion (RVO) have been reported. We conducted a systematic review using PRISMA methods to analyze the occurrence of RVO among people vaccinated by COVID-19 mRNA- vs viral vector- vaccines on 4 databases from 1-1-2021 to 31-12-2022 using specified MeSH terms. All included studies were assessed using JBI critical appraisal tools for eligibility. The final included studies are 31 studies (n=78 cases from 75 patients; 3 of these patients suffered twice). The median age of the patients was 61 years (28 to 96 years old) and most of them were female (52.00%). Thirty-nine patients received the mRNA vaccine (52.00%), while 36 patients received the viral vector vaccine (48.00%) before the event. The RVO diagnoses are based on physical examination confirmed by Fluorescein Angiography (FA), and/or Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT). The median time interval between vaccination and RVO was 6 days in the mRNA vaccine group and 4 days in the viral vector vaccine group. Central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) and Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion (BRVO) were tied as the most common diagnosis in the mRNA vaccine group (20.51% and 20.51%), whilst in the viral vector vaccine group CRVO was the most common diagnosis (17.94%). Most of these cases had good outcomes with improved visual impairment in one or both eyes. From this review, we could not ascertain that the RVO occurs due to the type of COVID-19 vaccines because of the detailed data on the dosage and the history of illness of each patient. However, the awareness that the RVO could develop after COVID-19 vaccination must be taken into consideration, even though it is rare.

Considerations of COVID-19 in Ophthalmology

Since its emergence in early 2020, the SARS-CoV-2 infection has had a significant impact on the entire eye care system. Ophthalmologists have been categorized as a high-risk group for contracting the virus due to the belief that the eye may be a site of inoculation and transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 infection. As a result, clinical ophthalmologists, optometrists, and eyecare professionals have had to familiarize themselves with the ocular manifestations of COVID-19, as well as its treatments and vaccines. The implementation of measures to prevent the transmission of the virus, such as restrictions, lockdowns, telemedicine, and artificial intelligence (AI), have led to substantial and potentially irreversible changes in routine clinical practice, education, and research. This has resulted in the emergence of a new mode of managing patients in a routine clinical setting. This brief review aims to provide an overview of various aspects of COVID-19 in ophthalmology, including the ocular manifestations related to the disease, the modes of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection, precautions taken in ophthalmic practice to prevent the spread of the virus, drugs, and vaccines used in the treatment of COVID-19, the impact of the pandemic on patients, clinicians, and the eye care system as a whole, and the future of ophthalmology conditioned by this global pandemic experience.

Retinal Vein Occlusion after COVID-19 Vaccination-A Review

Background Retinal vein occlusion (RVO) occurring after COVID-19 vaccination has been reported worldwide. Such a sight-threatening condition occurring after COVID-19 vaccination is a menace to ophthalmic health. This article reviews current evidence related to post-COVID-19 vaccination RVO. Method A total of 29 relevant articles identified on PubMed in January 2023 were selected for review. Observation All cases presented to ophthalmologists with visual loss shortly after COVID-19 vaccination. Mean and median age were both 58. No sex predominance was observed. RVO was diagnosed from findings on dilated fundal examination and ophthalmic imaging. AstraZeneca and BNT vaccines accounted for most cases. Vascular risk factors, e.g., diabetes mellitus and hypertension, were common. Most laboratory tests requested came back unremarkable. Most patients responded well to standard treatment, except those with ophthalmic comorbidities. Visual prognosis was excellent on short-term follow-up. Discussion The causality between RVO and COVID-19 vaccination is undeterminable because of the nature of articles, heterogenous reporting styles, contradicting laboratory findings and co-existing vascular risk factors. Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia, retinal vasculitis and homocysteinaemia were proposed to explain post-vaccination RVO. Large-scale studies have demonstrated that the incidence of RVO following COVID vaccination is very low. Nevertheless, the effects of boosters on retinal vasculature and ophthalmic health are still unclear. Conclusions The benefits of COVID-19 vaccination are believed to outweigh its ophthalmic risks. To ensure safe vaccination, the prior optimisation of comorbidities and post-vaccination monitoring are important. COVID-19 vaccines (including boosters) should be offered with reasonable confidence. Further studies are warranted to elucidate the ophthalmic impact of vaccines.