Ashish Sharma1, Chui Ming Gemmy Cheung2, Luis Arias-Barquet3, Sengul Ozdek4, Nikulaa Parachuri1, Nilesh Kumar1, Assaf Hilely5, Dinah Zur5, Anat Loewenstein5, Giovanna Vella6, Francesco Bandello6, Giuseppe Querques6. 1. Department of Vitreoretina, Lotus Eye Hospital and Institute, Coimbatore, India. 2. Singapore National Eye Center, Singapore. 3. Department of Ophthalmology, Bellvitge University Hospital, Feixa Llarga, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain. 4. Ophthalmology Department, Gazi University School of Medicine, Besevler, Ankara, Turkey. 5. Division of Ophthalmology, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center and Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel; and. 6. Department of Ophthalmology; University Vita-Salute, Scientific Institute San Raffaele, Milano, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To analyze the effect of fluid on visual acuity in cases of Type 3 macular neovascularization. METHODS: This multicentric, retrospective cohort study included eyes with treatment-naïve Type 3 macular neovascularization. Analysis of fluid in different compartments was performed. Group A included eyes with isolated intraretinal fluid, whereas Group B included eyes with intraretinal fluid in conjunction with subretinal fluid and/or sub retinal pigment epithelial fluid. RESULTS: Eyes in Group A (31, 55.3%) had better best-corrected visual acuity of 20/50 snellen equivalent (0.42 ± 0.31 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) at baseline and 20/50 snellen equivalent (0.40 ± 0.28 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) at complete resolution compared with Group B with visual acuity of 20/80 snellen equivalent (0.64 ± 0.35 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) (P = 0.0181) at baseline and 20/100 snellen equivalent (0.70 ± 0.40 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) (P = 0.0021) at complete resolution. Subfoveal atrophy was more in Group B (82.6% 19/23) at complete resolution in comparison to Group A (16/31, 51.6%). Eyes in Group B needed more anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections (10.3 ± 9.0) for complete resolution compared with Group A (5.7 ± 4.8). CONCLUSION: Intraretinal fluid may be associated with good visual acuity in Type 3 macular neovascularization in contrast to other forms of neovascular age related macular degeneration. Furthermore, intraretinal fluid in isolation may need fewer injections and could probably be associated with less subfoveal atrophy.
PURPOSE: To analyze the effect of fluid on visual acuity in cases of Type 3 macular neovascularization. METHODS: This multicentric, retrospective cohort study included eyes with treatment-naïve Type 3 macular neovascularization. Analysis of fluid in different compartments was performed. Group A included eyes with isolated intraretinal fluid, whereas Group B included eyes with intraretinal fluid in conjunction with subretinal fluid and/or sub retinal pigment epithelial fluid. RESULTS: Eyes in Group A (31, 55.3%) had better best-corrected visual acuity of 20/50 snellen equivalent (0.42 ± 0.31 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) at baseline and 20/50 snellen equivalent (0.40 ± 0.28 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) at complete resolution compared with Group B with visual acuity of 20/80 snellen equivalent (0.64 ± 0.35 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) (P = 0.0181) at baseline and 20/100 snellen equivalent (0.70 ± 0.40 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) (P = 0.0021) at complete resolution. Subfoveal atrophy was more in Group B (82.6% 19/23) at complete resolution in comparison to Group A (16/31, 51.6%). Eyes in Group B needed more anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections (10.3 ± 9.0) for complete resolution compared with Group A (5.7 ± 4.8). CONCLUSION: Intraretinal fluid may be associated with good visual acuity in Type 3 macular neovascularization in contrast to other forms of neovascular age related macular degeneration. Furthermore, intraretinal fluid in isolation may need fewer injections and could probably be associated with less subfoveal atrophy.