Harry W Flynn

Dr. Harry W Flynn


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

37Years (1990-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 March 2020 in Clinical Ophthalmology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SMSam E Mansour
Sam E Mansour
DBDavid J Browning
David J Browning
KWKeye Wong
Keye Wong
HFHarry W Flynn
Harry W Flynn
ABAbdhish R Bhavsar
Abdhish R Bhavsar
Purpose: To review the current therapeutic options for the management of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and diabetic macular edema (DME) and examine the evidence for integration of laser and pharmacotherapy. Methods: A review of the PubMed database was performed using the search terms diabetic retinopathy, diabetic macular edema, neovascularization, laser photocoagulation, intravitreal injection, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), vitrectomy, pars plana vitreous surgery, antiangiogenic therapy. With additional cross-referencing, this yielded 835 publications of which 301 were selected based on content and relevance. Results: Many recent studies have evaluated the pharmacological, laser and surgical therapeutic strategies for the treatment and prevention of DR and DME. Several newer diagnostic systems such as optical coherence tomography (OCT), microperimetry, and multifocal electroretinography (mfERG) are also assisting in further refinements in the staging and classification of DR and DME. Pharmacological therapies for both DR and DME include both systemic and ocular agents. Systemic agents that promote intensive glycemic control, control of dyslipidemia and antagonists of the renin-angiotensin system demonstrate beneficial effects for both DR and DME. Ocular therapies include anti-VEGF agents, corticosteroids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Laser therapy, both as panretinal and focal or grid applications continue to be employed in management of DR and DME. Refinements in laser devices have yielded more tissue-sparing (subthreshold) modes in which many of the benefits of conventional continuous wave (CW) lasers can be obtained without the adverse side effects. Recent attempts to lessen the burden of anti-VEGF injections by integrating laser therapy have met with mixed results. Increasingly, vitreoretinal surgical techniques are employed for less advanced stages of DR and DME. The development and use of smaller gauge instrumentation and advanced anesthesia agents have been associated with a trend toward earlier surgical intervention for diabetic retinopathy. Several novel drug delivery strategies are currently being examined with the goal of decreasing the therapeutic burden of monthly intravitreal injections. These fall into one of the five categories: non-biodegradable polymeric drug delivery systems, biodegradable polymeric drug delivery systems, nanoparticle-based drug delivery systems, ocular injection devices and with sustained release refillable devices. At present, there remains no one single strategy for the management of the particular stages of DR and DME as there are many options that have not been rigorously tested through large, randomized, controlled clinical trials. Conclusion: Pharmacotherapy, both ocular and systemic, will be the primary mode of intervention in the management of DR and DME in many cases when cost and treatment burden are less constrained. Conventional laser therapy has become a secondary intervention in these instances, but remains a first-line option when cost and treatment burden are more constrained. Results with subthreshold laser appear promising but will require more rigorous study to establish its role as adjunctive therapy. Evidence to support an optimal integration of the various treatment options is lacking. Central to the widespread adoption of any therapeutic regimen for DR and DME is substantiation of safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness by a body of sound clinical trials.

2 December 2011 in Eye
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
YAY Ahmed
Y Ahmed
ASA M Schimel
A M Schimel
APA Pathengay
A Pathengay
MCM H Colyer
M H Colyer
HFHarry W Flynn
Harry W Flynn

1 February 1991 in American Journal of Ophthalmology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
GFGregory M. Fox
Gregory M. Fox
BJBrian C. Joondeph
Brian C. Joondeph
HFHarry W Flynn
Harry W Flynn
SPStephen Pflugfelder
Stephen Pflugfelder
TRThomas J. Roussel
Thomas J. Roussel
We reviewed 19 cases of delayed-onset pseudophakic endophthalmitis in which diagnostic cultures were performed at one month or more after cataract extraction with posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation. We isolated four different organisms in these 19 cases: 12 Propionibacterium species (63%), three Candida parapsilosis (16%), three Staphylococcus epidermidis (16%), and one Corynebacterium species (5%). Because of the unusual delayed-onset features of these cases and the retrospective nature of this study, a variety of treatment regimens were used. Twelve patients had recurrence of marked inflammation despite an apparent initial cure, and ten of these patients had positive culture results on repeat examination of intraocular fluids. Nine patients continued to be treated with topical corticosteroids postoperatively to suppress low-grade inflammation. Of the 19 patients, 16 had final visual acuity of 20/400 or better. Delayed-onset pseudophakic endophthalmitis had a more favorable visual prognosis, compared to acute-onset endophthalmitis.

1 March 2018 in American Journal of Ophthalmology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
NRNidhi Relhan
Nidhi Relhan
RFRichard K. Forster
Richard K. Forster
HFHarry W Flynn
Harry W Flynn

20 September 2013 in Journal of Ophthalmic Inflammation and Infection
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JSJayanth Sridhar
Jayanth Sridhar
HFHarry W Flynn
Harry W Flynn
AKAjay E Kuriyan
Ajay E Kuriyan
Darlene MillerDarlene Miller
Darlene Miller
TAThomas Albini
Thomas Albini
The purpose of the current study was to analyze risk factors, clinical features, and treatment outcomes in patients with endogenous fungal endophthalmitis with yeast and mold infections. For this retrospective consecutive case series, microbiologic and clinical records were reviewed to identify all patients with intraocular culture-proven endogenous fungal endophthalmitis treated at a single institution between January 1, 1990 and December 31, 2011.

10 September 2014 in Journal of Ophthalmic Inflammation and Infection
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MRMedikonda Radhika
Medikonda Radhika
KMKopal Mithal
Kopal Mithal
ABAbhishek Bawdekar
Abhishek Bawdekar
VDVivek Dave
Vivek Dave
AJAnimesh Jindal
Animesh Jindal
HFHarry W Flynn
Harry W Flynn
Intravitreal antibiotics are the mainstay of treatment in the management of infectious endophthalmitis. Basic knowledge of the commonly used intravitreal antibiotics, which includes their pharmacokinetics, half-life, duration of action and clearance, is essential for elimination of intraocular infection without any iatrogenic adverse effect to the ocular tissue. Various drugs have been studied over the past century to achieve this goal. We performed a comprehensive review of the antibiotics which have been used for intravitreal route and the pharmacokinetic factors influencing the drug delivery and safety profile of these antibiotics. Using online resources like PubMed and Google Scholar, articles were reviewed. The articles were confined to the English language only. We present a broad overview of pharmacokinetic concepts fundamental for use of intravitreal antibiotics in endophthalmitis along with a tabulated compendium of the intravitreal antibiotics using available literature. Recent advances for increasing bioavailability of antibiotics to the posterior segment with the development of controlled drug delivery devices are also described.