2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Episodic Angle Closure after Visian™ Implantable Collamer Lens Implantation in a Patient Using Adderall ®

      case-report

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Amphetamine-based medications such as Adderall ®, used for the treatment of attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), may theoretically elicit angle closure through their adrenergic mechanisms. The relationship between the use of implantable collamer lenses (ICLs) and angle closure has been extensively investigated based on appropriate vault and lens sizing and postoperative changes in the anterior chamber angle (ACA) and corneal morphology. This case reflects a synergistic impact from both Adderall ® use and ICL implantation for the proposed mechanism of angle closure.

          Case Presentation

          A 36-year-old myopic female with ADHD controlled with Adderall ® underwent toric ICL implantation in the right eye after undergoing preoperative laser peripheral iridotomy. Shortly after, the patient developed episodic angle closure in the right eye, with episodes mainly occurring after taking an additional dose of Adderall ® in a dimly lit environment. The patient later had an ICL exchange with a smaller sized EVO+ toric ICL in the right eye and remained asymptomatic after.

          Conclusion

          Additive mechanisms from both the ICL and Adderall ® were present in our patient. The ICL caused crowding of the ACA through a pseudophacomorphic mechanism, and the Adderall ® caused increased iridotrabecular contact secondary to pharmacologic mydriasis. This resulted in episodic angle closure with subsequent spikes in the intraocular pressure. There are no current reports or studies in the current literature describing the combined mechanisms of ICL implantation and Adderall ® use in the potential development of angle closure. Further studies may be done to assess interactions of such medications in patients after ICL implantation.

          Related collections

          Most cited references15

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Amphetamine, past and present – a pharmacological and clinical perspective

          Amphetamine was discovered over 100 years ago. Since then, it has transformed from a drug that was freely available without prescription as a panacea for a broad range of disorders into a highly restricted Controlled Drug with therapeutic applications restricted to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and narcolepsy. This review describes the relationship between chemical structure and pharmacology of amphetamine and its congeners. Amphetamine’s diverse pharmacological actions translate not only into therapeutic efficacy, but also into the production of adverse events and liability for recreational abuse. Accordingly, the balance of benefit/risk is the key challenge for its clinical use. The review charts advances in pharmaceutical development from the introduction of once-daily formulations of amphetamine through to lisdexamfetamine, which is the first d-amphetamine prodrug approved for the management of ADHD in children, adolescents and adults. The unusual metabolic route for lisdexamfetamine to deliver d-amphetamine makes an important contribution to its pharmacology. How lisdexamfetamine’s distinctive pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile translates into sustained efficacy as a treatment for ADHD and its reduced potential for recreational abuse is also discussed.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            The Implantable Collamer Lens with a central port: review of the literature

            The purpose of this review is to summarize preclinical and clinical data from publications appearing in the peer-reviewed scientific literature relevant to the safety and effectiveness of the EVO Implantable Collamer Lens (ICL) posterior chamber phakic refractive lens with a central port (V4c Visian ICL with KS Aquaport, STAAR Surgical, Inc.). A literature search was conducted using PubMed.gov to identify all articles relating to the EVO ICL. Articles were examined for their relevance, and the references cited in each article were also searched for additional relevant publications. On the basis of a total of 67 preclinical studies and clinical reports, including effectiveness data on 1,905 eyes with average weighted follow-up of 12.5 months and safety data on 4,196 eyes with weighted average follow up of 14.0 months, the EVO ICL is safe and effective for the correction of a broad range of refractive errors. High levels of postoperative uncorrected visual acuity, refractive predictability, and stability demonstrate the effectiveness of the EVO ICL. Safety data suggest reduced rates of anterior subcapsular cataract and pupillary block compared with earlier models. Improved safety and proven effectiveness make EVO an attractive option for surgeons and patients.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Amphetamines for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults

              Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a childhood‐onset disorder characterised by inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity. ADHD can persist into adulthood and can affects individuals' social and occupational functioning, as well as their quality of life and health. ADHD is frequently associated with other mental disorders such as substance use disorders and anxiety and affective disorders. Amphetamines are used to treat adults with ADHD, but uncertainties about their efficacy and safety remain. To examine the efficacy and safety of amphetamines for adults with ADHD. In August 2017, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, 10 other databases, and two trials registers, and we ran citation searches for included studies. We also contacted the corresponding authors of all included studies, other experts in the field, and the pharmaceutical company, Shire, and we searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews for other published, unpublished, or ongoing studies. For each included study, we performed a citation search in Web of Science to identify any later studies that may have cited it. We searched for randomised controlled trials comparing the efficacy of amphetamines (at any dose) for ADHD in adults aged 18 years and over against placebo or an active intervention. Two review authors extracted data from each included study. We used the standardised mean difference (SMD) and the risk ratio (RR) to assess continuous and dichotomous outcomes, respectively. We conducted a stratified analysis to determine the influence of moderating variables. We assessed trials for risk of bias and drew a funnel plot to investigate the possibility of publication bias. We rated the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach, which yielded high, moderate, low, or very low quality ratings based on evaluation of within‐trial risk of bias, directness of evidence, heterogeneity of data; precision of effect estimates, and risk of publication bias. We included 19 studies that investigated three types of amphetamines: dexamphetamine (10.2 mg/d to 21.8 mg/d), lisdexamfetamine (30 mg/d to 70 mg/d), and mixed amphetamine salts (MAS; 12.5 mg/d to 80 mg/d). These studies enrolled 2521 participants; most were middle‐aged (35.3 years), Caucasian males (57.2%), with a combined type of ADHD (78.8%). Eighteen studies were conducted in the USA, and one study was conducted in both Canada and the USA. Ten were multi‐site studies. All studies were placebo‐controlled, and three also included an active comparator: guanfacine, modafinil, or paroxetine. Most studies had short‐term follow‐up and a mean study length of 5.3 weeks. We found no studies that had low risk of bias in all domains of the Cochrane 'Risk of bias’ tool, mainly because amphetamines have powerful subjective effects that may reveal the assigned treatment, but also because we noted attrition bias, and because we could not rule out the possibility of a carry‐over effect in studies that used a cross‐over design. Sixteen studies were funded by the pharmaceutical industry, one study was publicly funded, and two studies did not report their funding sources. Amphetamines versus placebo Severity of ADHD symptoms: we found low‐ to very low‐quality evidence suggesting that amphetamines reduced the severity of ADHD symptoms as rated by clinicians (SMD −0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) −1.04 to −0.75; 13 studies, 2028 participants) and patients (SMD −0.51, 95% CI −0.75 to −0.28; six studies, 120 participants). Retention: overall, we found low‐quality evidence suggesting that amphetamines did not improve retention in treatment (risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.13; 17 studies, 2323 participants). Adverse events: we found that amphetamines were associated with an increased proportion of patients who withdrew because of adverse events (RR 2.69, 95% CI 1.63 to 4.45; 17 studies, 2409 participants). Type of amphetamine: we found differences between amphetamines for the severity of ADHD symptoms as rated by clinicians. Both lisdexamfetamine (SMD −1.06, 95% CI −1.26 to −0.85; seven studies, 896 participants; low‐quality evidence) and MAS (SMD −0.80, 95% CI −0.93 to −0.66; five studies, 1083 participants; low‐quality evidence) reduced the severity of ADHD symptoms. In contrast, we found no evidence to suggest that dexamphetamine reduced the severity of ADHD symptoms (SMD −0.24, 95% CI −0.80 to 0.32; one study, 49 participants; very low‐quality evidence). In addition, all amphetamines were efficacious in reducing the severity of ADHD symptoms as rated by patients (dexamphetamine: SMD −0.77, 95% CI −1.14 to −0.40; two studies, 35 participants; low‐quality evidence; lisdexamfetamine: SMD −0.33, 95% CI −0.65 to −0.01; three studies, 67 participants; low‐quality evidence; MAS: SMD −0.45, 95% CI −1.02 to 0.12; one study, 18 participants; very low‐quality evidence). Dose at study completion: different doses of amphetamines did not appear to be associated with differences in efficacy. Type of drug‐release formulation: we investigated immediate‐ and sustained‐release formulations but found no differences between them for any outcome. Amphetamines versus other drugs We found no evidence that amphetamines improved ADHD symptom severity compared to other drug interventions. Amphetamines improved the severity of ADHD symptoms, as assessed by clinicians or patients, in the short term but did not improve retention to treatment. Amphetamines were associated with higher attrition due to adverse events. The short duration of studies coupled with their restrictive inclusion criteria limits the external validity of these findings. Furthermore, none of the included studies had an overall low risk of bias. Overall, the evidence generated by this review is of low or very low quality. Background Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a childhood‐onset psychiatric disorder that can persist into adulthood in up to 50% of patients. From a clinical point of view, ADHD is characterised by hyperactivity, mood instability, irritability, difficulties in maintaining attention, lack of organisation, and impulsive behaviours. Occurrence of other disorders at the the same time is common, especially mood disorders and substance abuse. Amphetamines (a type of stimulant) are thought to improve ADHD symptoms, but there are concerns about how safe they are for regular use by patients with ADHD. Review question We examined whether treatment with amphetamines improves the symptoms of ADHD in adults. Study characteristics Reviewers found 19 studies, which enrolled 2521 patients. Most patients were male (57.2%), middle‐aged (mean age 35.3 years) Caucasians (84.5%). These studies compared amphetamines to placebo (something that looks like an amphetamine but with no active ingredient), and three studies also compared amphetamines with other drugs such as guanfacine, modafinil, and paroxetine. In this review, we assessed the effects of three different kinds of amphetamines: dexamphetamine (from 10.2 to 21.8 mg/d), lisdexamfetamine (from 30 to 70 mg/d), and mixed amphetamine salts (MAS) (from 12.5 to 80 mg/d). Treatment length ranged from one to 20 weeks. Eighteen studies were conducted in the USA and one study in Canada and the USA. Ten studies were conducted at multiple sites. Study funding was reported in all but two studies. Sixteen studies were funded by the manufacturer, and one was funded by government agencies. All amphetamines reduced the severity of ADHD symptoms as rated by patients. Lisdexamfetamine and MAS also reduced the severity of ADHD symptoms as rated by clinicians, but dexamphetamine did not. Overall, amphetamines did not make people more likely to stay in treatment and were associated with higher risk of treatment ending early as the result of adverse events. We found no evidence suggesting that higher doses worked better than lower ones. We did not find any difference in effectiveness between amphetamines that act for longer periods of time versus those that act for shorter periods of time. Therefore, it appears that short‐term treatment with amphetamines reduces the severity of ADHD symptoms, but studies assessing the effects of amphetamines for longer periods of time are needed. We found no differences in effectiveness between amphetamines and guanfacine, modafinil, or paroxetine. Quality of the evidence The quality of the evidence was low to very low for all outcomes for several reasons, namely, it was possible for patients to know the treatment they were taking; the number of studies and included patients was low, leading to imprecise results for many outcomes; the studies had problems in their design; and, for some outcomes, results varied across trials.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Case Rep Ophthalmol
                Case Rep Ophthalmol
                COP
                COP
                Case Reports in Ophthalmology
                S. Karger AG (Basel, Switzerland )
                1663-2699
                18 July 2024
                Jan-Dec 2024
                18 July 2024
                : 15
                : 1
                : 565-571
                Affiliations
                [a ]Hoopes Vision Research Center, Hoopes Vision, Draper, UT, USA
                [b ]John A. Moran Eye Center, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
                [c ]Utah Lions Eye Bank, Murray, UT, USA
                [d ]University of Arizona College of Medicine-Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ, USA
                [e ]Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center-El Paso, El Paso, TX, USA
                Author notes
                Correspondence to: Majid Moshirfar, cornea2020@ 123456me.com
                Article
                540080
                10.1159/000540080
                11324241
                39144640
                4754878f-b3a4-4d47-9e01-b639308885b1
                © 2024 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel

                This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC) ( http://www.karger.com/Services/OpenAccessLicense). Usage and distribution for commercial purposes requires written permission.

                History
                : 10 April 2024
                : 26 June 2024
                : 2024
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 1, References: 15, Pages: 7
                Funding
                The authors have no funding to declare.
                Categories
                Case Report

                implantable collamer lens,angle closure,corneal refractive surgery,adderall,case report

                Comments

                Comment on this article