Ocular Manifestations in Hansen’s Disease

Ocular Manifestations in Hansen’s Disease Christina Samuel1, Sundararajan D2 1Postgraduate, 2HOD. Department Of Ophthalmology, Meenakshi Medical College, Kanchipuram, Tamil Nadu, India ABSTRACT Background: Leprosy or Hansen’s disease is a chronic mildly contagious granulomatous disease of tropical and subtropical regions caused by the rod shaped bacillus, Mycobacterium leprae. It affects the skin, peripheral nerves in hands and feet, mucous membrane of nose, throat and eyes. When left untreated it is capable of producing various deformities and disfigurements. Aim: To study the ocular involvement in patients with Leprosy under the parameters of age group, sex type and duration of leprosy. To study the different ocular manifestations and identify the potentially sight threatening lesions and provide early management. Methods: A prospective study of 50 cases diagnosed with Hansen’s disease were included. Detailed history and thorough clinical examination done. Potentially sight threatening lesions were managed conservatively or surgically. Results: Out of 50 cases of Leprosy, 58% had ocular involvement and majority were of the age group 21-40years. Ocular involv ement was predominantly seen in Lepromatous type with 35% having ocular lesions. The most common ocular manifestation observed was superciliary madarosis(48%). Potentially sight threatening lesions accounted for 72.4% of which lagophthalmos was common. No cases of blindness seen. Conclusion: Visual impairment is preventable in Leprosy if detected early. The risk of ocular complications increases with the duration of the disease, despite being treated with systemic anti-leprosy drugs. Keywords: Leprosy (Hansen’s disease), lepromatous, tuberculoid, slit skin smear, ocular involvement INTRODUCTION Leprosy or Hansen’s disease is a chronic infectious disease caused by an intracellular rod shaped acid fast bacilli Mycobacterium leprae which affects the skin, nasal mucosa, peripheral nerves and the anterior segment of the eye.1 Mycobacterium laprae was discovered by a Norwegian physician G.Armauer Hansen in the year 1874.1 The most ancient writings of ‘’SUSHRUTA SAMHITA’’ compiled in 600BC refers to leprosy as Vat Rakta or Vat Shonita and Kushtha2,3. Leprosy occurs in all ages and both sexes. Male: Female ratio is 2:14. Leprosy bacilli has a predilection for neural tissue and their target is Schwann cell. The fate and type of leprosy depends on the resistance and immunity of the affected individual5 ( Jopling, Mc Douglass 1996). There are 11million cases throughout the world and about 1/3rd have ocular manifestations.6 Prevalence of blindness due to leprosy is 4.7% of the population in India.7,8 Various studies shows ocular involvement in Leprosy patients. The frequency and types of involvement depends on the duration and form of the disease.2,9 Ocular lesions are common in lepromatous type of leprosy and presents with lepromatous nodules, conjunctivitis, keratitis, pannus, scleritis and uveitis. Lesions are rare in Tuberculoid type of leprosy and are secondary to the involvement of branches of facial nerve which presents with paralytic lagophthalmos, exposure keratitis and neurotrophic keratitis. Acute iridocyclitis and scleritis are seen in type 2 lepra reaction occurring in lepromatous leprosy.6 Blindness has been reported in 7% of patients secondary to lagophthalmos, uveitis, exposure keratitis and cataract8. Proper attention and early detection can prevent potentially sight threatening lesions. MATERIALS AND METHOD The present study was carried out in the out patient Department. of Ophthalmology and In patient department of Dermatology at Meenakshi Medical College and Hospital, Kanchipuram from March 2012-May 2014. In this study a total of 50 patients were taken, 38 males and 12 females of the age group 20years and above . Prior to the study an informed consent form from the patients and ethical clearance was obtained from the Institutional Ethics Committee. Inclusion Criteria: All diagnosed cases of leprosy. Old and new cases, both genders and age group of 20 years and above. Exclusion Criteria: Non compliant patients, Patients with pre existing ocular disorders due to other causes than leprosy. Type of study: A cross sectional descriptive study for a period of 14 months. Procedure: Relevant details of both ocular and systemic history, including details of lepra reaction and clinical examination of patients was recorded on a proforma. A detailed slit lamp examination of the anterior segment of eye was done. Visual Acuity recorded with help of Snellen’s chart10. Corneal sensation was checked with a wisp of cotton. IOP was recorded with help of Schiotz tonometer10. Fundus examination with 78D and IDO done. Lab investigations like haemogram, ESR, Urine routine and RBS done. Slit skin smear and skin biopsy from the ear lobe was performed by the Dermatologist and report obtained as positive for M.leprae (Ziehl Neelsen technique)11. Patients were started on systemic anti leprosy drugs(multi drug therapy) and treatment for lepra reactions. Patients with ocular manifestations were treated accordingly to their need of Lubricant eye drops, topical antibiotic with steroid drops, eye ointments, frequent blinking exercises, physiotherapy, lid taping at nigh t time and spectacle correction. RESULTS: In this study of 50 patients with leprosy, majority belonged to the age group of 21-40years (46%). 76% were males and 24% were females. Out of 50 cases, 30% were tuberculoid type, 22% lepromatous type and 48% borderline type. Out of 50 cases 58% had ocular involvement in which 45% were within the age group 21-40years. Out of the 29 cases with ocular involvement 72% were males. 35%with ocular manifestations were of lepromatous type of leprosy. 41.4% gave a positive history of lepra reaction. The ocular involvement was directly proportional to the duration of leprosy. 55% had leprosy more than 5 years. Superciliary madarosis (48%) was the most common ocular manifestation. The potentially sight threatening lesions were Lagophthalmos(35%), seen more in lepromatous type(14%). 28% had corneal hypoesthesia, 21% with exposure keratitis, 17% had corneal opacity, anterior uveitis and conjunctivitis each accounted for 7%. It was interesting to note that 60% of patients with lagophthalm os had exposure keratitis. DISCUSSION: The involvement of eyes in leprosy is due to infiltration of the tissues by the bacilli and damage to the nerves12. In this study 58% of the patients had ocular involvement. This can be compared to other studies of Wani.S.et al 2005 which showed 69% of ocular involvement, Gnanadoss A S et al 1986 showed 59.2% 13. Studies conducted by Shields shows 33% of potentially sight threatening lesions which included keratitis, iritis, lagophthalmos and secondary glaucoma14. In our study the potentially sight threatening lesions were lagophthalmos, exposure keratitis, uveitis, corneal hypoesthesia and corneal opacity which accounted nearly for 72.4%. Majority of the patients in our study were of the age group 21-40 years and male predominance was seen in both for, affected eyes with leprosy(76%) and ocular involvement (72%). This can be compared with the study by Wani.S et al (82.6%)12 which also showed predominance for men. This study further shows that ocular manifestation were se en more in lepromatous leprosy (75.36%) followed by borderline(14.49%) and tuberculoid leprosy(10.14%)12. In our study conducted, ocular involvement was 35% in lepramotous, 31% in borderline and 17% in tuberculoid type. The reason being that M.leprea has a favourable environment in the anterior segment of the eye and the bacilli is found more in lepromatous type of leprosy. Madarosis was the commonest ocular manifestation in our study which was about 48% when compared with Shield’s 1974(54%)14 and Acharaya B P (59.2%)15 and Wani.S. et al (72.46%)12. Lagophthalmos accounts for 35% in our study when compared to Wani.S et al (28.98%)12 , Acharaya B P (34.3%)15 , Lamba et al 1983 (13%)16 , Shields 1974 (29%)14 and Weerekon 1972 (27%)17. Lagophthalmos is commonly associated with lepra reaction in the face and damage to the facial nerve and also depends in patients with lepromatous leprosy(14%) which is similar to the observation by Wani.S et al (18.84%)12. In this study corneal in volvement was seen in 66% of the patients, corneal hypoesthesia 28%, exposure keratitis 21% and corneal opacity in 17%. In the study conducted by Wani.S et al corneal involvement (36.23%)12 . Radhakrishnan N et al observed that the major cause of blindness in leprosy was exposure keratitis due to lagophthalmos(23%) and leucoma (25%)18. Cataractous changes in lens was seen in 17% of the patients, but it was not a complication due to leprosy or MDT but merely due to senile lens changes in the older age group of the patients in our study. This is also supported by the study from Gnanadoss A S et al13. Iris pearls seen in anterior uveitis are said to be the pathognomic of leprosy19,20. But in our study uveitis was observed only in 7% of the patients when compared to Wani S et al12 which showed 31.88%. This probably is due to the small sample size of our study and also the duration of leprosy not being more than 10 years for all patients ,because uveitis is seen mostly in chronic cases o f leprosy. This is supported by various studies like Lamba 1983 16(14%), Hornblass 197321 (16%) and Gnanadoss A S et al 198613 (5.6%). In this study all patients with ocular manifestations were either treated formerly(58.6%) or presently (41.4%) with systemic anti leprosy drugs. Courtright et al suggested that ocular pathology will still occur in MDT treated leprosy patients22. Thus treatment does not prevent the occurrence of ocular lesions12. Moreover once the patient is on treatment the ocular reaction is seen more in the first 6-12 months due to reactions23. The progressive leprosy related lesions are the result of chronic nerve damage. CONCLUSION: The risk of ocular lesions increases with the duration of disease, lepra reaction and facial patches in this reaction. Screening of all patients affected with leprosy can help in identifying the potentially sight threatening lesions which can be treated earlier. Visual impairment if detected early is preventable. The Multi Drug therapy for leprosy has improved the outcome of the affected with leprosy but does not retard the development of ocular complication. LIMITATIONS: Owing to the small sample size in this study many other ocular manifestations could not be assessed. A relationship between uveitis, Complicated cataract and leprosy can be suggested if the patients presents with a longer duration of leprosy more than 10 years, as in this study we had only 4 patients in that category. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT It is with the sense of accomplishment and deep gratitude that we dedicate the work to all those who have been instrumental in its completion. We are greatly thankful to the RMO, Meenakshi Medical College Hospital and Research Institute, Kanchipuram. To our Associate Professors, Assistant Professors, Colleagues and Staffs of the Department of Ophthalmology and Dermatology for their timely help, support and constant guidance in our work. REFERENCE 1.Lewallen, Paul Courtright. An overwiew of ocular leprosy after two decades of multidrug therapy. International Ophthalmology Clinics world blindness. Sept2004, vol47(3):87-99. 2. Dharmendra. History of spread and decline of leprosy. Leprosy.Vol I, Bombay: Kothari Medical Publishing House,197;7-21. 3. Rastogi N, Rastogi RC. Leprosy in ancient India. Int J Lepr 1984;52:541-3. 4. Park K. Epidemiology of Communicable Diseases. Park’s Textbook of Preventive and Social Medicine. 17thedn., Jabalapur: M/S Banarsidas Bhanot Publishers, 2002; 242-253. 5. The disease In: Handbook of Leprosy, 5th edn., Delhi CBS Publishers and distribution; 1996;10-53. 6. Sihota. Tandon disease of uveal tract. Chapter 17.Parsons’ Diseases of the Eye,20th Edition. New Delhi. Elsivier 2007;239-72. 7. Thompson Allardice et al, Patterns of ocular morbidity and blindness in leprosy: Leprosy review vol 77(2) June 2006. 8. Ffytche TJ. Residual sight threatening lesions in leprosy patient completing Multidrug therapy and Sulphone monotherapy, Lepr. Rev, 1991;62: 35-43. 9. Mark J. Mannis Mascai, Arthur. Leprosy, chapter 62. Eye and skin disease, Lippincott- Raven publishers, 1996;543-50. 10. Orthoptists and Prescribing in NSW, VIC and SA. The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists. Retrieved 29 July 2010. 11. PVS Prasad. Microbiology. In: all about leprosy. 1st edn. Jaypee brothers publishers,2005.pg 4-11. 12. Junaid S. Wani, Saiba Rashid M.S. Ocular manifestations in leprosy- A clinical study; JK- Practitioner 2005; 12(1): 14-17. 13. Gnanadoss AS, Rajendran N. Ocular lesions in Hansen’s (leprosy). IJO 1986;34:19-23. 14.Jerry A Shields; George O; Waring; AJO,1974,77;880-890. 15. Acharaya B P. Ocular involvement in Leprosy- A study in mining areas of India. IJO 1978; 26:21-4. 16. Lamba PA; Arthanariswaran: Leprosy India 1983,55;490. 17. Lloyd Weerekon: BJO. 1972,56;106. 18. Radhakrishnan N, Albert S. Blindness due to leprosy. IJO 1980;28:19-21. 19. Ffytche. T.J., 1981, Trans. Ophthal. Soc. U.K. 101:325. 20. Hogeweg, M. Leiker, 1983, Brit J Dermat.109:477. 21. Albert Hornblass: AJO.1973,75;478. 22. Courtright. P., Lu Fang Hu. Multi drug therapy and eye diseases in leprosy. A cross sectional study in People’s Republic of China. Int . J. Epidemiol. 1994;23(4):835-42. 23. Dr. Margreet Hogeweg, Prevention of Blindness due to Leprosy. ICEH, http://www.iceh.org.uk.

Nike Position Paper

Nike Position Paper In our prevalent society today, there is an intricate debate between boycotting and supporting many different transnational corporations such as Nike, Inc. It has been inferred that Nike breaches multiple human rights acts and workplace violations. Dissidently, Nike’s total net income is 273. 4 billion dollars and their annual revenue adds up to approximately 19 billion dollars. This concludes that global citizens are more than voluntary to purchase their merchandise and endorse their business. Nike is involved in several environmental projects such as building athletic courts out of recycled shoes and their â€Å"air pockets† in numerous models of sport sneakers use nitrogen instead of SF6, which is a greenhouse gas. Nike also has â€Å"green† events associated with The Green Project of Long Island in New York State. Nike manufactures in over 30 countries and sells in over 160, with about 36,000 employees’ total. They also have rights to Hurley International and Nike invests in professional athletes to promote their goods. Nike has dynamic and monumental marketing skills that influence our generation conspicuously. In correlation, multinational business’ pay acceptable wages to workers because they have an innumerable amount of expenses unseen by most people. Corporations have significant distribution and tariff expenses bringing their products to market. Furthermore, transnationals’ pay acceptable wages given that profit margins are not as great as people may assume. Competition between producers is so fierce that profits for 214 companies in 1999 were limited to an average of 8. 3%. A wage premium is also applied where wages are 40% to 100% greater than the average rate in many developing countries. It has been fathomed that Nike violates labor laws. But, anti-globalization people often distort the truth on this topic, as in the case of the fake German documentary film against Ikea. It has also been acquiesced that corporations exploit their workers. It is valid that employees’ work long hours, but a New York Times article indicated that the workers do this willingly because this allows them to make more money than they might be able to earn otherwise. Mass business’ such as Nike, constitute investment and the increased export income improves a country’s equilibrium of payment, introduces otherwise unavailable goods and services that are essential for diversifying production, and stimulates local entrepreneurship by subcontracting to local industries and enhancing competition. â€Å"You don’t win silver, you lose gold,† is a famous Nike quote that has much controversy behind it, as do many business affairs pertaining to this iconic corporation. While workers in Indonesia are being paid around 21,000 dollars a year for a myriad amount of hours of hard labor in one day, one of Nike’s promotional athletes, NBA player Kobe Bryant, is being paid over 500,000 dollars a week to bounce a ball around. Workers are told to sign a contract which removes all their rights, they are typically fired by the age of 35, and Safety & Health Administration has found more than 1000 plus violations. Irrevocably, there are two definitive positions of transnational corporations. They have an agglomeration of flaws, but none that can be condemned irremediable. You hear a different opinion from each worker, each newspaper and each monopoly spokesperson. To ostracize such a beneficial asset to our economy would be asinine. People are kept off the streets, with paying jobs, and are making a contribution to society one shoe at a time.

How Can You Help Soldiers That Have Served For You

How can you help soldiers that have served for you? Soldiers over time have struggled with multiple disorders and one these disorders is Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.Soldiers and veterans struggle with balancing combat experiences; as well as, trying to live a normal life. Hundreds of thousands of United States veterans are not able to leave the horrors of the war battlefield behind.Over time there have been to many soldiers and veterans that struggle with PTSD other known as Post-Traumatic stress disorder. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder is the reason why these strong and courageous military service member cannot live a normal life once discharge due to the things they have seen or done in combat . One out of every five military†¦show more content†¦Post traumatic stress disorder has many effects on people in everyday life ; such as ,the effects in family, friends, and even careers. Post traumatic stress disorder is quite common in today s military. The reason for this can somewhat be explained in the definition of PTSD . The type of anxiety disorder that comes from an event in which you ve seen or experienced a traumatic event that involved the threat of injury or death. Our soldiers, while they are deployed, are faced with that potentially fatal threat everyday overseas. This is why PTSD is most common in soldiers; however , there are also a number of cases of PTSD in civilians too . PTSD also has a significant effect on your friends and family etc. â€Å"The author , a leading feminist researcher , discusses The National Center of the PTSD among soldiers and veterans . This site offers the details behind dealing with post - traumatic stress disorder and the proper way to deal with those who as well suffer such as friends , family etc . The National Center for PTSD part of the Department of Veterans Affairs , provides information about the post - traumatic stress disorder to help soldiers deal with the real world versus the war world , letting th em know that things will be okay , they re also support groups for loved ones ; as well as for example showing key steps to let you know how you could help your loves come at peace with their war experiences ’’(Karen)

Mister Potato Organization As The Background Business

Introduction: With this unit’s assignment project work I will take Mister Potato organization as the background business. Mister Potato is the best potato chips brand in Malaysia. Mister Potato is used the fresh potato imported from the best farm in the US and Australia. Each potato is elaborately manual picked to make sure all the potato in seamless. Mister potato chips using trans-fat free way and cooked in vegetable oil. Mister Potato has 6 different flavours like original, hot and spicy, sour cream and onion, tomato, barbeque and fiery hot and spicy. For now, Mister Potato is sold in over 100 countries such as Australia, Russia, Maldives, Singapore, Netherlands and the Middle East. Organisation’s mission à ¼ To produce the best and delicious snack in Melbourne. à ¼ To ensure customers perceive their products as the nutritionally balanced products. à ¼ To ensure the business operate in a sustainable way which can benefits all the business stakeholders. Identify / confirm the organisation’s vision Research the organisations purpose and value from either internal materials, owners, directors or senior management Vision To change the perception of potato chips as the junk food and change the customers’ awareness of potato chips as the snack can bring you relax. Values Mister Potato organization will utilize the highest standards and level to achieve and balance the product quality, customer service and business innovation and development and we will always strive to make a