BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: Aim to identify incidence and prevalence of laser-induced retinal injuries in the Northern Ireland paediatric population and to determine negative clinical and OCT indicators in relation to visual acuity. SUBJECTS/ METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of retinal injuries secondary to handheld laser pens over a 6-year time period with presenting and final visual acuity (VA), laser source and circumstances of the injury recorded. Fundus photographs and OCT images for each case were also collated. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients (74 eyes) were identified of which 72% were male and mean age was 11.6 years. 40% of patients were symptomatic. Mean presenting VA was 0.16 LogMAR. VA was ≤0.30 LogMAR in 20 eyes (27%) at presentation. Features which impacted VA to a significant level were foveolar location, diffuse morphology, ELM and BM/RPE/IDZ disruption and ORH presence on presenting OCT images. ORHs or ELM disruption resulted in a significant risk ratio of 3.5 (p = 0.002) and 3.4 (p = <0.001) respectively. Mean presenting VA was demonstrated to improve during follow-up from 0.36 to 0.22 LogMAR (n = 20, p = 0.03). When VA was ≤0.30 LogMAR at presentation, mean presenting VA improved from 0.56 to 0.29 LogMAR (p < 0.01) with 58% of eyes improving to a VA of better than 0.30 LogMAR. CONCLUSIONS: The overall visual loss from macular laser injuries was low and we have identified features on retinal imaging that significantly impact presenting VA. When VA is affected following macular laser injury there is evidence of recovery with >50% of those presenting with VA ≤ 0.30 LogMAR improving to better than 0.30 LogMAR.
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: Aim to identify incidence and prevalence of laser-induced retinal injuries in the Northern Ireland paediatric population and to determine negative clinical and OCT indicators in relation to visual acuity. SUBJECTS/ METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of retinal injuries secondary to handheld laser pens over a 6-year time period with presenting and final visual acuity (VA), laser source and circumstances of the injury recorded. Fundus photographs and OCT images for each case were also collated. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients (74 eyes) were identified of which 72% were male and mean age was 11.6 years. 40% of patients were symptomatic. Mean presenting VA was 0.16 LogMAR. VA was ≤0.30 LogMAR in 20 eyes (27%) at presentation. Features which impacted VA to a significant level were foveolar location, diffuse morphology, ELM and BM/RPE/IDZ disruption and ORH presence on presenting OCT images. ORHs or ELM disruption resulted in a significant risk ratio of 3.5 (p = 0.002) and 3.4 (p = <0.001) respectively. Mean presenting VA was demonstrated to improve during follow-up from 0.36 to 0.22 LogMAR (n = 20, p = 0.03). When VA was ≤0.30 LogMAR at presentation, mean presenting VA improved from 0.56 to 0.29 LogMAR (p < 0.01) with 58% of eyes improving to a VA of better than 0.30 LogMAR. CONCLUSIONS: The overall visual loss from macular laser injuries was low and we have identified features on retinal imaging that significantly impact presenting VA. When VA is affected following macular laser injury there is evidence of recovery with >50% of those presenting with VA ≤ 0.30 LogMAR improving to better than 0.30 LogMAR.
Authors: Johannes Birtel; Wolf M Harmening; Tim U Krohne; Frank G Holz; Peter Charbel Issa; Philipp Herrmann Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2017-12-08 Impact factor: 5.594