Differential effect of long versus short wavelength light exposure on pupillary re-dilation in patients with outer retinal disease.

BACKGROUND: In patients with outer retinal degeneration, a differential pupil response to long wavelength (red) versus short wavelength (blue) light stimulation has been previously observed. The goal of this study was to quantify differences in the pupillary re-dilation following exposure to red versus blue light in patients with outer retinal disease and compare them with patients with optic neuropathy and with healthy subjects. DESIGN: Prospective comparative cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-three patients with outer retinal disease, 13 patients with optic neuropathy and 14 normal subjects. METHODS: Subjects were tested using continuous red and blue light stimulation at three intensities (1, 10 and 100 cd/m2) for 13 s per intensity. Pupillary re-dilation dynamics following the brightest intensity was analysed and compared between the three groups. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The parameters of pupil re-dilation used in this study were: time to recover 90% of baseline size; mean pupil size at early and late phases of re-dilation; and differential re-dilation time for blue versus red light. RESULTS: Patients with outer retinal disease showed a pupil that tended to stay smaller after light termination and thus had a longer time to recovery. The differential re-dilation time was significantly greater in patients with outer retinal disease (median = 28.0 s, P < 0.0001) compared with controls and patients with optic neuropathy. CONCLUSIONS: A differential response of pupil re-dilation following red versus blue light stimulation is present in patients with outer retinal disease but is not found in normal eyes or among patients with visual loss from optic neuropathy.

Management of fragility fractures in Switzerland: results of a nationwide survey.

A nationwide survey was conducted in Switzerland to assess the quality level of osteoporosis management in patients aged 50 years or older presenting with a fragility fracture to the emergency ward of the participating hospitals. Eight centres recruited 4966 consecutive patients who presented with one or more fractures between 2004 and 2006. Of these, 3667 (2797 women, 73.8 years old and 870 men, 73.0 years old in average) were considered as having a fragility fracture and included in the survey. Included patients presented with a fracture of the upper limbs (30.7%), lower limbs (26.4%), axial skeleton (19.5%) or another localisation, including malleolar fractures (23.4%). Thirty-two percent reported one or more previous fractures during adulthood. Of the 2941 (80.2%) hospitalised women and men, only half returned home after discharge. During diagnostic workup, dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measurement was performed in 31.4% of the patients only. Of those 46.0% had a T-score < or =-2.5 SD and 81.1% < or =-1.0 SD. Osteoporosis treatment rate increased from 26.3% before fracture to 46.9% after fracture in women and from 13.0% to 30.3% in men. However, only 24.0% of the women and 13.8% of the men were finally adequately treated with a bone active substance, generally an oral bisphosphonate, with or without calcium / vitamin D supplements. A positive history of previous fracture vs none increased the likelihood of getting treatment with a bone active substance (36.6 vs 17.9%, ? 18.7%, 95% CI 15.1 to 22.3, and 22.6 vs 9.9%, ? 12.7%, CI 7.3 to 18.5, in women and men, respectively). In Switzerland, osteoporosis remains underdiagnosed and undertreated in patients aged 50 years and older presenting with a fragility fracture.