Optical coherence tomography findings in persistent diabetic macular edema

Purpose To assess the optical coherence tomography (OCT) characteristics of eyes with persistent clinically significant diabetic macular edema (PDME) after focal laser treatment, with emphasis on the vitreomacular interface (VMI) characteristics. Design Prospective, observational case series. Method...

وصف كامل

محفوظ في:
التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
المؤلف الرئيسي: Ghazi, Nicola G. (author)
مؤلفون آخرون: Ciralsky, Jessica B. (author), Shah, Syed M. (author), Campochiaro, Peter A. (author), Haller, Julia A. (author)
التنسيق: article
منشور في: 2007
الوصول للمادة أونلاين:http://hdl.handle.net/10725/10800
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2007.07.012
http://libraries.lau.edu.lb/research/laur/terms-of-use/articles.php
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002939407006344
الوسوم: إضافة وسم
لا توجد وسوم, كن أول من يضع وسما على هذه التسجيلة!
الوصف
الملخص:Purpose To assess the optical coherence tomography (OCT) characteristics of eyes with persistent clinically significant diabetic macular edema (PDME) after focal laser treatment, with emphasis on the vitreomacular interface (VMI) characteristics. Design Prospective, observational case series. Methods Fifty eyes with PDME after at least one focal laser treatment were enrolled prospectively. Slit-lamp biomicroscopy, stereoscopic fundus photography, fluorescein angiography (FA), and OCT were performed for each eye. The main outcome measures included the detection rate of VMI abnormalities (VMIA) by OCT in comparison with biomicroscopy, fundus photography, and FA (traditional techniques); the relationship between VMIA and the number of focal laser sessions per eye and FA leakage pattern. Results Two of 50 eyes were excluded because of incomplete data. For the remaining 48 eyes, 25 eyes (52.1%) demonstrated definite VMIA, including anomalous vitreal adhesions, epiretinal membrane (ERM), or both, and six eyes (12.5%) had questionable VMIA. OCT in general was 1.94 times more sensitive than traditional techniques combined in detecting VMIA (P = .00003). The number of focal laser sessions and diffuse FA leakage were not associated with an increased prevalence of VMIA (P = .13 and P = .47, respectively). Conclusions This study demonstrates a high prevalence of VMIA in eyes with PDME after focal laser treatment and underscores the superiority of OCT in detecting these abnormalities. OCT evaluation of eyes with PDME may be helpful in identifying VMIA, which may impact treatment selection and patient subgroup stratification.