Nathan R Mathews1, Sergey Tarima2, Do-Gyun Kim3, Judy E Kim4. 1. Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States. 2. Division of Biostatistics, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States. 3. Department of Ophthalmology, Retina Service, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States Department of Ophthalmology, Myongji Hospital, Goyang-si, Gyeonggi-do, Korea. 4. Department of Ophthalmology, Retina Service, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We evaluated the change in foveal contour in eyes with idiopathic epiretinal membrane (ERM) before and four months following pars plana vitrectomy with internal limiting and epiretinal membrane peeling, and correlated foveal contour with best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) parameters. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of consecutive patients undergoing surgery with pre- and postoperative OCT. Foveal contour grading was devised according to the thickness of the fovea relative to the surrounding macula from OCT radial line scans: Grade 0, foveal depression relative to surrounding macula; Grade 1, relative flatness; and Grade 2, fovea thicker than surrounding macula. Baseline and follow-up grades were compared for change and correlated with BCVA, central retinal thickness (CRT), central subfield thickness (CST), central subfield volume (CSV), and integrity of the ellipsoid zone (EZ). RESULTS: Among 41 eyes of 41 patients, mean follow-up was 125 days. No eyes were Grade 0 at baseline; 7 of 41 eyes were Grade 0 at follow-up. Baseline Grade 1 eyes improved CRT (P < 0.001), CST (P < 0.001), CSV (P = 0.002), and BCVA (P = 0.022). Baseline Grade 2 eyes improved CRT (P < 0.001), CST (P < 0.001), and CSV (P < 0.001), but not BCVA (P = 0.369). CONCLUSIONS: We developed a novel foveal contour grading method to assess retinal contour in ERM eyes before and after surgery. In eyes with ERM and no foveal depression, the majority did not regain foveal depression following surgery even though retinal thickness improved. Copyright 2014 The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
PURPOSE: We evaluated the change in foveal contour in eyes with idiopathic epiretinal membrane (ERM) before and four months following pars plana vitrectomy with internal limiting and epiretinal membrane peeling, and correlated foveal contour with best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) parameters. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of consecutive patients undergoing surgery with pre- and postoperative OCT. Foveal contour grading was devised according to the thickness of the fovea relative to the surrounding macula from OCT radial line scans: Grade 0, foveal depression relative to surrounding macula; Grade 1, relative flatness; and Grade 2, fovea thicker than surrounding macula. Baseline and follow-up grades were compared for change and correlated with BCVA, central retinal thickness (CRT), central subfield thickness (CST), central subfield volume (CSV), and integrity of the ellipsoid zone (EZ). RESULTS: Among 41 eyes of 41 patients, mean follow-up was 125 days. No eyes were Grade 0 at baseline; 7 of 41 eyes were Grade 0 at follow-up. Baseline Grade 1 eyes improved CRT (P < 0.001), CST (P < 0.001), CSV (P = 0.002), and BCVA (P = 0.022). Baseline Grade 2 eyes improved CRT (P < 0.001), CST (P < 0.001), and CSV (P < 0.001), but not BCVA (P = 0.369). CONCLUSIONS: We developed a novel foveal contour grading method to assess retinal contour in ERM eyes before and after surgery. In eyes with ERM and no foveal depression, the majority did not regain foveal depression following surgery even though retinal thickness improved. Copyright 2014 The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
Authors: P Massin; C Allouch; B Haouchine; F Metge; M Paques; L Tangui; A Erginay; A Gaudric Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2000-12 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Anselm Kampik; Kenneth R Kenyon; Ronald G Michels; W Richard Green; Zenaida C de la Cruz Journal: Retina Date: 2005 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: J R Wilkins; C A Puliafito; M R Hee; J S Duker; E Reichel; J G Coker; J S Schuman; E A Swanson; J G Fujimoto Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 1996-12 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Tisileli S Tuifua; Arjun B Sood; Joseph R Abraham; Sunil K Srivastava; Peter K Kaiser; Sumit Sharma; Aleksandra Rachitskaya; Rishi P Singh; Jamie Reese; Justis P Ehlers Journal: Ophthalmol Retina Date: 2021-02-27