AIM: The aim of the study was the analysis of reticular drusen (RDR) in patients with age-related macular degeneration using simultaneous confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (cSLO) and spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) at different time points. METHODS: Included in this retrospective analysis were 47 eyes from 32 patients (median age 80.1 years, range 66-89 years) with RDR at baseline and at least one follow-up visit. Registration of the cSLO near-infrared reflectance image and the SD-OCT B-scan (Spectralis HRA + OCT, Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg) at different time points was carried out using the AutoRescan tool. RESULTS: While either no alterations or increase in the RDR area (n=19 eyes) or RDR density (n=15) were seen by cSLO imaging, the analysis of the SD-OCT B-scans at different time points revealed a more complex picture. An increase in two well visible lesions at the baseline visit was detected in 8 eyes at the first follow-up and in 3 eyes at the second follow-up examination. A regression was seen in 5 eyes at the first follow-up and in 3 eyes at the second follow-up visit. In most eyes (n=23), an increase of one with a parallel decrease of the second RDR lesion in the identical B-scan was identified at the first follow-up visit, whereas individual RDR showed an increase at the second follow-up examination that had initially shown a decrease in size at the first follow-up visit. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate underlying dynamic processes in the development and changes of RDR over time. For a more accurate analysis, the exact registration of SD-OCT B-scans at different time points and the use of high-resolution very dense volume scans would be helpful in order to assess such discrete changes of miniscule intraretinal lesions over time.
AIM: The aim of the study was the analysis of reticular drusen (RDR) in patients with age-related macular degeneration using simultaneous confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (cSLO) and spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) at different time points. METHODS: Included in this retrospective analysis were 47 eyes from 32 patients (median age 80.1 years, range 66-89 years) with RDR at baseline and at least one follow-up visit. Registration of the cSLO near-infrared reflectance image and the SD-OCT B-scan (Spectralis HRA + OCT, Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg) at different time points was carried out using the AutoRescan tool. RESULTS: While either no alterations or increase in the RDR area (n=19 eyes) or RDR density (n=15) were seen by cSLO imaging, the analysis of the SD-OCT B-scans at different time points revealed a more complex picture. An increase in two well visible lesions at the baseline visit was detected in 8 eyes at the first follow-up and in 3 eyes at the second follow-up examination. A regression was seen in 5 eyes at the first follow-up and in 3 eyes at the second follow-up visit. In most eyes (n=23), an increase of one with a parallel decrease of the second RDR lesion in the identical B-scan was identified at the first follow-up visit, whereas individual RDR showed an increase at the second follow-up examination that had initially shown a decrease in size at the first follow-up visit. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate underlying dynamic processes in the development and changes of RDR over time. For a more accurate analysis, the exact registration of SD-OCT B-scans at different time points and the use of high-resolution very dense volume scans would be helpful in order to assess such discrete changes of miniscule intraretinal lesions over time.
Authors: Matthias M Mauschitz; Sofia Fonseca; Petrus Chang; Arno P Göbel; Monika Fleckenstein; Glenn J Jaffe; Frank G Holz; Steffen Schmitz-Valckenberg Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2012-07-26 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Robert J Klein; Caroline Zeiss; Emily Y Chew; Jen-Yue Tsai; Richard S Sackler; Chad Haynes; Alice K Henning; John Paul SanGiovanni; Shrikant M Mane; Susan T Mayne; Michael B Bracken; Frederick L Ferris; Jurg Ott; Colin Barnstable; Josephine Hoh Journal: Science Date: 2005-03-10 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Jonathan L Haines; Michael A Hauser; Silke Schmidt; William K Scott; Lana M Olson; Paul Gallins; Kylee L Spencer; Shu Ying Kwan; Maher Noureddine; John R Gilbert; Nathalie Schnetz-Boutaud; Anita Agarwal; Eric A Postel; Margaret A Pericak-Vance Journal: Science Date: 2005-03-10 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Noemi Lois; Sarah L Owens; Rosa Coco; Jill Hopkins; Frederick W Fitzke; Alan C Bird Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Steffen Schmitz-Valckenberg; Julia S Steinberg; Monika Fleckenstein; Sivatharisini Visvalingam; Christian K Brinkmann; Frank G Holz Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2010-02-16 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: S Schmitz-Valckenberg; C K Brinkmann; M Fleckenstein; B Heimes; S Liakopoulos; G Spital; F G Holz Journal: Ophthalmologe Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 1.059
Authors: Maximilian Pfau; Moritz Lindner; Martin Gliem; Julia S Steinberg; Sarah Thiele; Robert P Finger; Monika Fleckenstein; Frank G Holz; Steffen Schmitz-Valckenberg Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2018-08-01 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Alessandro Rabiolo; Riccardo Sacconi; Maria Vittoria Cicinelli; Lea Querques; Francesco Bandello; Giuseppe Querques Journal: Clin Ophthalmol Date: 2017-09-20
Authors: Marlene Sassmannshausen; Maximilian Pfau; Sarah Thiele; Rolf Fimmers; Julia S Steinberg; Monika Fleckenstein; Frank G Holz; Steffen Schmitz-Valckenberg Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2020-08-03 Impact factor: 4.799