Foveal microstructure and visual function in patients with lamellar macular hole, epiretinal membrane foveoschisis or macular pseudohole,Eye

当前位置： X-MOL 学术 › Eye › 论文详情

Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)

Foveal microstructure and visual function in patients with lamellar macular hole, epiretinal membrane foveoschisis or macular pseudohole
Eye ( IF 3.9 ) Pub Date : 2021-11-19 , DOI: 10.1038/s41433-021-01818-1
Kentaro Nakamura ₁ , Tatsuya Inoue ₁ , Koichi Nagura ₁ , Yui Tanaka ₁ , Rei Arasaki ₁ , Ryo Asaoka _{2,

3} , Yasuo Yanagi ₁ , Maiko Maruyama-Inoue ₁ , Kazuaki Kadonosono ₁

Affiliation

Purpose

To compare the foveal microstructures, such as the prevalence of epiretinal proliferation (EP) and residual ellipsoid zone (EZ), in eyes with lamellar macular hole (LMH), epiretinal retinal membrane (ERM) foveoschisis and macular pseudohole (MPH), and to investigate the association of the foveal microstructure with visual functions.

Method

In addition to the prevalence of EP, we calculated the residual EZ index within 1mm and 3 mm (rEZ1 and rEZ3) in all examined eyes. Comparisons were conducted to baseline characteristics (logMAR visual acuity [logMAR VA], metamorphopsia score [Mave], central retinal thickness [CRT], the prevalence of EP, rEZ1 and rEZ3) between MPH, ERM foveoschisis and LMH subgroups. The relationships (1) between logMAR VA and each of age, type (MPH, ERM foveoschisis and LMH), the prevalence of EP, rEZ1, rEZ3, spherical equivalent (SE) and CRT and (2) between Mave and each of variables were investigated.

Results

Fifty-one eyes of 48 patients were enroled. The mean age was 65.2 ± 11.1 years. Ten eyes were diagnosed as LMH, 22 eyes as ERM foveoschisis and 19 eyes as MPH, respectively. There was a significant difference in CRT only between LMH and ERM foveoschisis (p = 0.023). There was a tendency toward significance in rEZ1 between LMH and ERM foveoschisis (p = 0.057), but not in rEZ3. The optimal model for logMAR VA included age, rEZ1, SE and CRT. On the other hand, the optimal model for Mave included the prevalence of EP, rEZ1 and SE.

Conclusion

Microstructural observations are useful to predict visual functions in LMH, ERM foveoshisis and MPH.

中文翻译：

板层黄斑裂孔、视网膜前膜中心凹劈裂或黄斑假性孔患者的中心凹微观结构和视功能

目的

比较黄斑区板层裂孔 (LMH)、视网膜前视网膜膜 (ERM) 中心凹劈裂和黄斑假性孔 (MPH) 眼中的中心凹微结构，例如视网膜前增生 (EP) 和残留椭圆体区 (EZ) 的发生率，以及研究中心凹微结构与视觉功能的关联。

方法

除了 EP 的患病率外，我们还计算了所有检查眼中 1 毫米和 3 毫米内的残留 EZ 指数（rEZ1 和 rEZ3）。对 MPH、ERM 中心凹劈裂和 LMH 亚组之间的基线特征（logMAR 视力 [logMAR VA]、变形评分 [Mave]、中央视网膜厚度 [CRT]、EP、rEZ1 和 rEZ3 的患病率）进行了比较。logMAR VA 与每个年龄、类型（MPH、ERM foveoschisis 和 LMH）、EP、rEZ1、rEZ3、等效球镜 (SE) 和 CRT 之间的关系 (1) 和 (2) Mave 与每个变量之间的关系是调查。

结果

登记了 48 名患者的 51 只眼睛。平均年龄为 65.2 ± 11.1 岁。诊断为LMH 10只眼、ERM中心凹劈裂22只眼和MPH 19只眼。只有 LMH 和 ERM 中心凹劈裂之间的 CRT 存在显着差异 ( p = 0.023)。LMH 和 ERM 中心凹劈裂之间的 rEZ1 有显着性趋势 ( p = 0.057)，但 rEZ3 没有。logMAR VA 的最佳模型包括年龄、rEZ1、SE 和 CRT。另一方面，Mave 的最佳模型包括 EP、rEZ1 和 SE 的流行。