Vision loss and vascular compromise with facial and periocular injections

Vision Loss Secondary to Facial and Periorbital Steroid Injection: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

The risk of ophthalmic and retinal artery occlusions following facial and periorbital steroid injection has not been explored. This systematic review examines the prevalence, risk factors, and treatment outcomes of steroid-induced vision losses.

METHODS

A literature search in Evidence Based Medicine Reviews, MEDLINE, Embase, Pubmed, ClinicalTrials, and WHO ICTRP was performed for vision loss following facial and periorbital corticosteroid injections through July 2020.

RESULTS

Of 35 case reports, series, and reviews, 49 patients (56 eyes) with steroid-induced vision loss were analyzed. Injection sites predominantly involved the nose (45%) and periocular regions (10%). The most common type of steroid is triamcinolone (54%). Most cases were unilateral, except 7 cases of bilateral vision losses, 4 of which resulted from unilateral steroid injection. Symptoms were reported during or immediately after injections in 49% of cases. Most occlusions occurred in the ophthalmic (53%) or central retinal artery (33%). Vision most commonly presented as no light perception (37%), and 90% were 20/200 or worse. Final visual outcomes varied from 20/200 or worse (56%), 20/40 or better (30%), to in between (13%).

CONCLUSION

Most vision losses resulted from steroid injections in the nasal and periorbital area. Triamcinolone was the most common offending agent, likely due to large particle size, low solubility, and extensive particle aggregation. Dexamethasone has the opposite pharmacologic properties and has never been reported in association with vascular occlusion related vision loss. Careful steroid selection, injection techniques, and treatment strategies should be considered to prevent and treat artery occlusion.

Soft-tissue Filler-associated Blindness: A Systematic Review of Case Reports and Case Series

BACKGROUND

With the increase in the use of soft-tissue fillers worldwide, there has been a rise in the serious adverse events such as vascular compromise and blindness. This article aims to review the role of fillers in causing blindness and the association between hyaluronic acid (HA) filler and blindness.

METHODS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were used to report this review.

RESULTS

A total of 190 cases of blindness due to soft-tissue fillers were identified, of which 90 (47%) cases were attributed to autologous fat alone, and 53 (28%) cases were caused by HA. The rest of the cases were attributed to collagen, calcium hydroxylapatite, and other fillers.

CONCLUSIONS

Autologous fat was the most common filler associated with blindness despite HA fillers being the most commonly used across the globe. However, the blindness caused by other soft-tissue fillers like collagen and calcium hydroxylapatite was represented. It was also evident through the review that the treatment of HA-related blindness was likely to have better outcomes compared with other fillers due to hyaluronidase use.