| Literature DB >> 35436918 |
Jingyang Feng1,2,3,4, Jiayi Yu1,2, Qiuying Chen1,2, Hao Zhou1,2, Fenge Chen1,2, Weijun Wang1,2, Xun Xu1,2,3,4, Ying Fan5,6,7,8,9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To investigate the long-term surgical outcomes and prognostic factors of foveal detachment (FD) in pathological myopia.Entities:
Keywords: ATN classification; Foveal detachment; Myopic maculopathy; Prognostic factor; Vitrectomy
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35436918 PMCID: PMC9017033 DOI: 10.1186/s12886-022-02391-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Ophthalmol ISSN: 1471-2415 Impact factor: 2.086
Baseline characteristics of the study population
| Baseline parameters | FD eyes (n = 61) |
|---|---|
| Mean ± SD | 59.97 ± 9.63 |
| Range | 38–83 |
| Male, n (%) | 18 (29.5%) |
| Female, n (%) | 43 (70.5%) |
| Mean ± SD | 4.28 ± 4.77 |
| Range | 0.5–24 |
| Mean ± SD | -13.56 ± 4.18 |
| Range | -6.00 - -24.00 |
| Mean ± SD | 29.57 ± 1.69 |
| Range | 26.03–33.22 |
| Mean ± SD | 1.34 ± 0.52 |
| 52 (85.2%) | |
| Pseudophakic, n (%) | 9 (14.8%) |
| Macular retinoschisis, n (%) | 57 (93.4%) |
| Vitreomacular traction, n (%) | 17 (27.9%) |
| Outer lamellar macular hole, n (%) | 27 (44.3%) |
| Inner lamellar macular hole, n (%) | 10 (16.4%) |
FD foveal detachment, SER spherical equivalent refraction, BCVA best corrected visual acuity, logMAR logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution
Fig. 1Distributions of MAM and MNM grade in FD eyes at baseline. All FD eyes had MAM. A2 was observed in 27 eyes (44.3%), followed by A3, A1 and A4 which were observed in 14 eyes (22.9%), 13 eyes (21.3%) and 7 eyes (11.5%) respectively. Over half of FD eyes (57.4%) didn’t has MNM (N0). N1, N2a and N2s were detected in 15 eyes (24.6%), 3 eyes (4.9%) and 8 eyes (13.1%) respectively
Fig. 2Representative OCT images of four kinds of complication accompanied by FD at baseline. (A) FD (asterisk) accompanied by macular retinoschisis (black arrows). (B) FD accompanied by vitreomacular traction (white arrows). (C) FD accompanied by outer lamellar macular hole (white brace). (D) FD accompanied by inner lamellar macular hole (white arrowhead)
Correlations between MAM or MNM grade and baseline parameters in FD eyes
| Baseline parameters | MAM grade | MNM grade | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.262 | 0.262 | |||
| -0.282 | -0.229 | 0.076 | ||
| 0.052 | 0.693 | 0.135 | 0.305 | |
| -0.260 | -0.108 | 0.408 | ||
| 0.385 | 0.140 | 0.282 | ||
| 0.422 | 0.402 | |||
| 0.662 | ||||
| 0.662 | ||||
| Macular retinoschisis | -0.100 | 0.445 | 0.053 | 0.686 |
| Vitreomacular traction | 0.014 | 0.913 | 0.040 | 0.762 |
| Outer lamellar macular hole | -0.152 | 0.241 | -0.305 | |
| Inner lamellar macular hole | 0.008 | 0.951 | -0.018 | 0.888 |
MAM myopic atrophy maculopathy, MNM myopic neovascular maculopathy, SER spherical equivalent refraction, BCVA best corrected visual acuity, logMAR logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution
P value was based on Spearman’s correlation test, significant difference bolded
Fig. 3Representative images of FD eyes. (First row) baseline fundus photographs. (Second row) baseline SS-OCT images. (Third row) SS-OCT images at 6 months after surgery. (Forth row) SS-OCT images at 12 months after surgery. (Fifth row) SS-OCT images at 24 months after surgery. (Sixth row) fundus photographs at 24 months after surgery. (A) Left eye of a 63-year-old female patient with tessellated fundus and without neovascular change (A1T3N0) underwent vitrectomy with air tamponade. (B) Right eye of a 69-year-old female patient with patchy chorioretinal atrophic fundus and Fuchs spot in the macular area (A3T3N3) underwent vitrectomy and oil tamponade. (C) Right eye of a 68-year-old male patient with diffuse chorioretinal atrophic fundus (A2T3N0), accompanied by VMT and O-LMH, underwent vitrectomy and air tamponade. The patient had secondary macula hole after primary surgery and accepted a secondary vitrectomy and oil tamponade
Linear regression analysis of postoperative BCVA or foveal reattachment period and baseline parameters in the model
| Baseline parameters | Postoperative BCVA (logMAR) | Foveal reattachment period (m) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| 95% CI |
|
| 95% CI | |||
|
| -0.004 | 0.005 | 0.470 | -0.013 to 0.006 | -0.011 | 0.120 | 0.928 | -0.253 to 0.231 |
|
| 0.114 | 0.104 | 0.281 | -0.096 to 0.323 | 1.848 | 2.564 | 0.475 | -3.313 to 7.009 |
|
| 0.009 | 0.009 | 0.299 | -0.009 to 0.027 | -0.256 | 0.219 | 0.249 | -0.696 to 0.185 |
|
| -0.010 | 0.015 | 0.520 | -0.040 to 0.020 | -0.088 | 0.367 | 0.812 | -0.827 to 0.652 |
|
| -0.058 | 0.040 | 0.154 | -0.138 to 0.023 | -1.757 | 0.983 | 0.080 | -3.736 to 0.221 |
|
| 0.354 | 0.092 |
| 0.170 to 0.539 | 0.464 | 2.258 | 0.838 | -4.082 to 5.009 |
|
| 0.213 | 0.072 |
| 0.069 to 0.358 | 5.670 | 1.763 |
| 2.121 to 9.220 |
|
| -0.013 | 0.059 | 0.826 | -0.132 to 0.106 | -3.503 | 1.458 |
| -6.438 to -0.568 |
|
| ||||||||
| Macular retinoschisis | -0.539 | 0.166 |
| -0.873 to -0.204 | -2.475 | 4.087 | 0.548 | -10.702 to 5.752 |
| Vitreomacular traction | 0.292 | 0.102 |
| 0.085 to 0.498 | 0.406 | 2.521 | 0.873 | -4.668 to 5.481 |
| Outer lamellar macular hole | -0.025 | 0.093 | 0.785 | -0.212 to 0.161 | -2.261 | 2.279 | 0.326 | -6.850 to 2.327 |
| Inner lamellar macular hole | 0.085 | 0.121 | 0.482 | -0.157 to 0.328 | -0.366 | 2.965 | 0.902 | -6.335 to 5.602 |
|
| -0.188 | 0.097 | 0.058 | -0.383 to 0.007 | 1.027 | 2.380 | 0.668 | -3.764 to 5.819 |
Se (B) = standard error of B coefficient, SER = spherical equivalent refraction, BCVA = best corrected visual acuity, logMAR = logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution, MAM = myopic atrophy maculopathy, MNM = myopic neovascular maculopathy
P value was based on linear regression model, significant difference bolded
Adjusted R2 for postoperative BCVA = 0.465, for foveal reattachment period = 0.525
Fig. 4Associations between preoperative ocular parameters and the occurrence of secondary macular hole after vitrectomy for FD in the logistic regression model. After adjustment of age and gender, FD eyes accompanied by VMT (OR = 1.309, P = 0.003) or O-LMH (OR = 1.369, P < 0.001) at baseline were more likely to develop secondary macular hole after vitrectomy. No significant associations were found between occurrence of secondary macular hole and duration of symptoms, SER, axial length, preoperative BCVA, MAM grade, MNM grade or tamponade material (P > 0.05)