Journals / Retina-Vitreus / 2020 / Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 3

Relation between Visual Acuity, Macular Retinal Thickness, Visual Field and Multifocal Electroretinography in Patients with Retinitis Pigmentosa

Pages
220–226
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

We think that ophthalmologic examination together with anatomical and functional tests will be useful in the clinical follow-up of these patients.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose: To investigate the correlation between corrected visual acuity (CVA), macular retinal thickness, visual fi eld and multifocal electroretinography (mfERG) responses in patients with retinitis pigmentosa (RP).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: The study included RP patients who were admitted to our clinic between January 2014 and December 2018 and had CVA at least ≥0.05.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:We think that ophthalmologic examination together with anatomical and functional tests will be useful in the clinical follow-up of these patients.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2014 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Purpose: To investigate the correlation between corrected visual acuity (CVA), macular retinal thickness, visual fi eld and multifocal electroretinography (mfERG) responses in patients with retinitis pigmentosa (RP). Materials and Methods: The study included RP patients who were admitted to our clinic between January 2014 and December 2018 and had CVA at least ≥0.05. All patients underwent thorough ophthalmologic examination. Spectral domain (SD) optical coherence tomography (OCT) was performed to assess macular retinal thickness and standard central 30-2 threshold test was used as visual fi eld test. The visual fi eld responses, matching to mfERG, were estimated by calculating average value for 5 concentric rings. Correlation analysis was performed among CVA, macular retinal thickness, visual fi eld and mfERG responses. Results: Forty-four eyes of 22 patients were included in the study. The mean age was 30.6±13.0 (range 17 to 52) years in the study population. The CVA ranged from 0.05 to 1. In our study, there was a positive correlation between CVA, macular retinal thickness (r=0.668, p<0.01), visual fi eld (r=0.578, p<0.01) and mfERG responses for ring 1 (r=0.511, p<0.01). Conclusion: In addition to ophthalmologic examination, visual fi eld, SD-OCT and mfERG are important tests in the follow-up of patients with RP. We think that ophthalmologic examination together with anatomical and functional tests will be useful in the clinical follow-up of these patients.

🔖

Cite This Article

TANRIVERDİ, C., TABAKÇI, B. N., ŞENTÜRK, F. (2020). Relation between Visual Acuity, Macular Retinal Thickness, Visual Field and Multifocal Electroretinography in Patients with Retinitis Pigmentosa. Retina-Vitreus, Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 3, 220–226. https://ajindex.com/articles/304774

References (17)

  1. Wang AL, Knight DK, Vu TT, et al. Retinitis Pigmentosa: Review of Current Treatment. Int Ophthalmol Clin 2019; 59(1): 263-280
  2. Erdinç MA, Gürelik G. Retinitis pigmentozada geliştirilmekte olan tedavi seçenekleri. Ret-Vit 2004; 12: 65-75
  3. Sandberg MA, Brockhurst RJ, Gaudio AR, et al. The association between visual acuity and central retinal thickness in retinitis pigmentosa. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2005; 46:3349-3354
  4. Villate N, Lee JE, Venkatraman A, et al. Photoreceptor layer features in eyes with closed macular holes: optical coherence tomography fi ndings and correlation with visual outcomes. Am J Ophthalmol 2005; 139:280-289
  5. Ko TH, Fujimoto JG, Schuman JS, et al. Comparison of ultrahigh and standard resolution optical coherence tomography for imaging macular pathology. Ophthalmology 2005;112 (11): 1922.e1-15
  6. Daiger SP, Bowne SJ, Sullivan LS. Perspective on genes and mutations causing retinitis pigmentosa. Arch Ophthalmol 2007; 125: 151–158
  7. Özdek Ş. Retina Distrofi leri. Ret-Vit 2010; 18:125-133
  8. Hazırolan D, Demir MN, Özkan Aksoy N, ve ark. Retinitis pigmentozalı hastalarda makuler OKT. Ret-Vit 2008; 16: 222-225
  9. Milam AH, Li ZY, Fariss RN. Histology of human retina in retinitis pigmentosa. Prog Retin Eye Res 1998; 17: 175-205
  10. Van Soest S, Westerveld A, de Jong PT, et al. Retinitis pigmentosa: defi ned from molecular point of view. Surv Ophthalmol 1999; 34: 1659-1676
  11. Nagy D, Schönfi sch B, Zrenner E, et al. Long-term follow-up of retinitis pigmentosa patients with multifocal electroretinography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2008; 49(10): 4664-4671
  12. Sutter EE, Tran D. The fi eld topography of ERG components in man. I. The photopic luminance response. Vision Res. 1992; 32(3): 433–446
  13. Lai TY, Chan WM, Lai RY, et al. The clinical applications of multifocal electroretinography: a systematic review. Surv Ophthalmol. 2007; 52(1): 61-96
  14. Holtan JP, Selmer KK, Heimdal KR, et al. Inherited retinal disease in Norway- a characterization of current clinical and genetic knowledge. Acta Ophthalmol. 2019 Aug 19. doi: 10.1111/aos.14218. PMID: 31429209
  15. Sun X, Pawlyk B, Xu X, et al. Gene therapy with a promoter targeting both rods and cones rescues retinal degeneration caused by AIPL1 mutations. Gene Ther 2010; 17(1):117–131
  16. Busskamp V, Duebel J, Balya D, et al. Genetic reactivation of cone photoreceptors restores visual respon- ses in retinitis pigmentosa. Science 2010; 329(5990): 413–417
  17. Enzmann V, Yolc