• Users Online: 34273
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page

   Table of Contents      
PHOTO ESSAY
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 66  |  Issue : 11  |  Page : 1612-1614

Unilateral corneal edema in young: A diagnostic dilemma


Dr. Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

Date of Submission19-Apr-2018
Date of Acceptance16-Aug-2018
Date of Web Publication25-Oct-2018

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Dewang Angmo
Room No. 374, Third Floor, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_564_18

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 


Keywords: Congenital hereditary corneal dystrophy, corneal edema, Harboyan syndrome, polymegathism, polymorphism, specular microscopy


How to cite this article:
Angmo D, Selvan H, Behera AK, Suman PK. Unilateral corneal edema in young: A diagnostic dilemma. Indian J Ophthalmol 2018;66:1612-4

How to cite this URL:
Angmo D, Selvan H, Behera AK, Suman PK. Unilateral corneal edema in young: A diagnostic dilemma. Indian J Ophthalmol [serial online] 2018 [cited 2024 Mar 28];66:1612-4. Available from: https://journals.lww.com/ijo/pages/default.aspx/text.asp?2018/66/11/1612/244069



A 27-year-old male was referred to us as a case of unilateral glaucoma with corneal haze. Elaborate history taking revealed painless diminution in vision OS for past 18 months and presence of hearing impairment since childhood. Family history was not contributory [Figure 1].
Figure 1: A four generation pedigree chart computed based on the elicited family history

Click here to view


The best-corrected visual acuity OD was 6/6 and OS 1/60. Intraocular pressure (IOP) was OD: 12 and OS: 18 mmHg (on two topical medications) and both eyes had normal corneal sensations. Slit lamp showed OD to be apparently normal while OS demonstrated diffuse corneal haze [Figure 2]. There were no keratic precipitates or corneal vascularization, and further clinical evaluation was not possible due to media haze. Due to diagnostic dilemma, we re-evaluated the fellow eye to look for any clue. To our surprise, on specular reflection, the apparently normal fellow eye showed enlarged endothelial cells [Figure 3]. Specular microscopy of OD showed 650 cells/mm2 and co-efficient of variation 38. Hexagonality% could not be picked up, but the picture was suggestive of increased polymorphism [Figure 3]. The specular count of OS was not capturable due to corneal edema. Anterior segment OCT of both eyes showed increased pachymetry, OD: 690 μ and OS: 850 μ (corneal edema) [Figure 4]. Confoscan of the fellow normal eye confirmed polymegathism [Figure 3].
Figure 2: Slit-lamp biomicroscopic photography under diffuse illumination, (a) OD which appears apparently normal. (b) OS with diffuse corneal edema

Click here to view
Figure 3: Images of OD, (a) slit-lamp biomicroscopic specular reflection showing enlarged polymorphic endothelial cells. (b) Confocal microscopic section of the endothelium showing the same. (c) Specular microscopy showing, cell count 650/mm2, and co-efficient of variation 38%. The frame shows spread out, enlarged, and polymorphic endothelial cells

Click here to view
Figure 4: Anterior segment optical coherence tomography images, (a) of the right eye with pachymetry 690μ (b) of the left eye showing diffuse stromal edema (850 μ)

Click here to view


Being a bilateral endothelial disease at this young age, a diagnosis of congenital hereditary endothelial dystrophy (CHED)[1] was made. Pure tone audiometry was performed which showed moderate sensorineural hearing loss, implying the diagnosis of the “Harboyan syndrome”.[2]

The patient was then advised to stop the topical glaucoma medications one by one under monitoring, even after which the IOP remained within normal range. The patient was started on topical hypertonic saline and registered for endothelial keratoplasty.


  Conclusion Top


A comprehensive work-up of both eyes is essential before prematurely concluding at the diagnosis, to avoid redundant patient mismanagement.

Declaration of patient consent

The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent forms. In the form the patient(s) has/have given his/her/their consent for his/her/their images and other clinical information to be reported in the journal. The patients understand that their names and initials will not be published and due efforts will be made to conceal their identity, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
Weiss JS, Møller HU, Aldave AJ, Seitz B, Bredrup C, Kivelä T, et al. IC3D classification of corneal dystrophies – edition 2. Cornea 2015;34:117-59.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Desir J, Abramowicz M. Congenital hereditary endothelial dystrophy with progressive sensorineural deafness (Harboyan syndrome). Orphanet J Rare Dis 2008;3:28.  Back to cited text no. 2
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4]


This article has been cited by
1 Response to comment on ‘Unilateral corneal edema in young: A diagnostic dilemma’
Dewang Angmo, Harathy Selvan, AswiniK Behera, PramodK Suman
Indian Journal of Ophthalmology. 2019; 67(3): 442
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
Abstract
Conclusion
References
Article Figures

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1395    
    Printed39    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded183    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal