Paraproteinemic Keratopathy The Expanding Diversity of Clinical and Pathologic Manifestations

Purpose: To describe 7 patients with paraproteinemic keratopathy and to highlight the clinical and pathologic diversity of this rare entity and the importance of timely, systemic evaluation. Design: Retrospective, multicenter collaborative case series. Participants: Seven patients with paraproteinemic keratopathy. Methods: Clinical and pathologic records were reviewed to identify patients with well-documented corneal immunoglobulin deposits. Detailed ophthalmologic and medical histories were assembled. In 6 patients, corneal tissue was evaluated histochemically and immunohistochemically; in selected cases, corneal tissue was evaluated by in situ hybridization and ultrastructurally. Main Outcome Measures: Visual acuity and anterior segment examination at presentation and follow-up; local therapy; systemic diagnosis and management; and histopathologic, immunohistochemical, in situ hybridization, and ultrastructural findings. Results: Seven patients were identified with corneal immunoglobulin deposition. In addition to previously reported crystalline, nummular, patch-like, and lattice-like corneal opacities, prominent corneal vascularization was present in 2 patients mimicking interstitial keratitis and limbal stem cell deficiency. All patients had evidence of paraproteinemia in a setting of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance, smoldering plasma cell myeloma, or Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia. Corneal findings were the first manifestation of systemic disease in 4 patients, and the diagnosis was not suspected in 3 of these patients. Pathologic evaluation of biopsied corneal and conjunctival tissues demonstrated immunoglobulin deposits. Previously unreported ultrastructural patterns in the cornea were noted: large scroll-like immunotactoid deposits, immune complex-like deposits, and randomly arranged fibrils morphologically intermediate between amyloid and immunotactoid deposits. Surgical intervention to improve vision was performed in 4 patients, with recurrence of deposits in 3 patients. Three patients underwent systemic therapy with diminution of the deposits and improvement in vision in 1 patient. Conclusions: The clinical and pathologic expressions of corneal immunoglobulin deposits are protean and present a diagnostic challenge. Early recognition of this rare entity is important to address the potentially serious associated systemic disease. (C) 2015 by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.