Optic neuritis is assumed to be immune-mediated, although the specific antigens that cause demyelination are uncertain. Systemic T-cell activation is detected at the onset of symptoms, which occurs before alterations in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). The optic nerve disease is a rare disease and can occur in one or both eyes, especially in those with no established inflammatory or autoimmune illnesses. Adult ophthalmic neuritis is usually unilateral and is frequently associated with multiple sclerosis (MS). Generally, it starts as a rapid loss of vision and pain in eye movement. It progresses and achieves the maximal deficiency over a week. The objectives of this paper were to determine the association between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and optic neuritis and to study the management of optic neuritis in the resolving phase of COVID-19. A case study was done on a 38-year-old female complaining of sudden diminution of vision in her right eye for one week. She tested positive on the reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test for COVID-19 for which she was managed symptomatically and was started on antiretrovirals. This case report is based on an infrequent COVID-19 complication. It has been proposed that this virus has the probability of manifesting various neurological complications. In our case, optic neuritis occurs mainly three weeks after COVID-19 infection. Our patient was managed by intravenous methylprednisolone injection followed by oral prednisone for 14 days. So, further case studies will be required to support the above treatment plan for optic neuritis caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Unilateral or bilateral optic neuritis can occur as a neurological complication in the resolving stage of COVID-19 infection. Early detection and treatment with steroids can result in the best visual outcome.

A 23 year old young lady was admitted for Ayurveda treatments of her refractive error coupled with migraine. She was put on Shadbindu Taila Nasya, 24 drops in both her nostrils immediately the next day. Within 6 h of performing Nasya, the patient started developing pyrexia which was initially of low grade, and later, within 6 h, went on to high-grade. Nasya was suspended, and rescue Ayurveda medicines were started but had no improvement. The patient later self-medicated an antipyretic drug, and with a single dose, the high-grade pyrexia came down to normal. Naranjo adverse drug reaction probability scale recording gave a score of six, which shows that the AE could be probably due to Nasya with Shadbindu Taila. This case report adds evidence to the medical database of under-reported/poorly reported adverse effects (AE) cases of Nasya therapy. It shows that Nasya is not a 100 % complication and adverse effect free treatment, but rather has to be done with extreme caution. This case report highlights that effective Ayurveda principle based preparatory treatments are also to be done before initiating Nasya to minimize the chances of adverse effects. This case report also suggests practicing a test dose of Nasya, before initiating a high dose, so as to detect adverse events and prevent severe complications.

The aim of the case report is to present refractive error with accommodative insufficiency as a possible postinfectious manifestation of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Three weeks after the COVID-19 infection, a 22-year-old subject presented with blurring of distance and near vision with a frontal headache after prolonged near work. The patient was not using any refractive correction before the COVID-19 infection. This case report describes the diagnosis, management, and treatment of accommodative dysfunction in a patient with a history of COVID-19 infection.

OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively analyze the potential sources of error for IOL power calculation in patients with X-linked related megalocornea (XLMC).
METHODS: Case report and comparative analysis of refractive outcomes in previously reported phacoemulsification procedures in XLMC cases.
RESULTS: A 52-year-old patient with XLMC and cataracts underwent bilateral clear corneal phacoemulsification, capsule tension ring (CTR) insertion, and in the bag intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. Two years after the procedure the IOL remained centrally located and stable in both eyes. In the postoperative refraction, the patient had a large hyperopic refractive error in the right eye, and a moderate hyperopic refractive error in the left eye. A similar pattern was observed in previously reported cases. Pooling all cases together we observed that the Holladay II formula produced more accurate IOL power calculations than the SRK-T formula. Still, both formulas diverged from the ideal IOL power by approximately 1 diopter per mm of axial length in subjects with axial lengths larger than 24 mm.
CONCLUSIONS: Axial length seems to be the main source of IOL power calculation error in XLMC patients. Compared to SRK-T the Holladay II formula provides better refractive results, yet both formulas may require further adjustment depending on the axial length.