4.4 Article

SUBFOVEAL CHOROIDAL THICKNESS IN FELLOW EYES OF PATIENTS WITH CENTRAL SEROUS CHORIORETINOPATHY

Journal

RETINA-THE JOURNAL OF RETINAL AND VITREOUS DISEASES
Volume 31, Issue 8, Pages 1603-1608

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/IAE.0b013e31820f4b39

Keywords

central serous chorioretinopathy; choroidal thickness; choroidal vascular hyperpermeability; enhanced depth imaging optical coherence tomography; fellow eye; indocyanine green angiography; symptomatic eye

Categories

Funding

  1. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [21592261] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To evaluate the subfoveal choroidal thickness in the fellow eyes of patients with CSC, a disease often associated with choroidal vascular hyperpermeability even in eyes without subretinal fluid. Methods: In this observational cross-sectional study, we measured the bilateral subfoveal choroidal thickness in patients with unilateral CSC using enhanced depth imaging spectral-domain optical coherence tomography. Areas of choroidal vascular hyperpermeability were visualized with indocyanine green angiography. Results: Sixty-six consecutive Japanese patients (50 men, 16 women; mean age, 52.8 years) with unilateral CSC were examined. The subfoveal choroid in symptomatic eyes was significantly thicker than that in fellow eye (414 +/- 109 mu m vs. 350 +/- 116 mu m, P < 0.001, respectively). The subfoveal choroid of eyes with choroidal vascular hyperpermeability was 410 +/- 92 mu m, which differed significantly (P < 0.001) from the choroid (239 +/- 59 mu m) of fellow eyes without choroidal vascular hyperpermeability. Conclusion: The subfoveal choroid in the fellow eyes of patients with CSC was thicker in the eyes with choroidal vascular hyperpermeability. Enhanced depth imaging spectral-domain optical coherence tomography can assess the effects of choroidal vascular hyperpermeability by measuring the choroidal thickness noninvasively. RETINA 31: 1603-1608, 2011

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available