AI Summary & Key Takeaways
AI InsightThey can also indicate the numbers of injections needed for treatment.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the usability of CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores in clinical practice for age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and their effects on treatment prognosis in wet-type AMD. Materials and Methods: Ninety patients with dry-type AMD aged 65-90 years, 115 patients with wet-type AMD, and 90 controls without any retinal disease were included in the study. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) values and previously administered intravitreal anti-VEGF injection (IVI) treatments were recorded. The ejection fractions of the patients were measured and evaluated for the diagnosis of congestive heart failure (CHF). The presence of diabetes mellitus (DM), hypertension (HT), history of stroke, and vascular diseases (VD) was questioned. Results: A significant difference was observed between the AMD groups only in terms of DM and VD (p=0.032 and 0.011, respectively). There was also a significant difference between the groups in terms of CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores, but these two scoring systems were not superior to each other in ROC analysis. When the wet-type AMD cases were compared according to the number of injections, there was a significant difference in terms of CHF, DM, stroke, and VD. (p=0.001, 0.01, 0.02, and 0.01, respectively). When the treatment groups were compared in terms of the CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores, a statistically significant difference was found (p=0.01 and 0.05, respectively), and as the number of intravitreal injections required for treatment increased, the score increased for both systems. Conclusions: CHADS2 and CHADS2-VASC clinical scoring systems can be predictors of AMD. They can also indicate the numbers of injections needed for treatment.