4.7 Article

Retinal OCT Findings in Patients after COVID Infection

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
Volume 10, Issue 15, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm10153233

Keywords

COVID-19; optical coherence tomography; angiography; retina; choroid; vascular complications

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to compare optic nerve, retina, and retinal vessel parameters in recovered COVID-19 patients and healthy patients using OCT-a. The results showed no significant differences in the measured parameters, indicating that COVID-19 did not have a noticeable impact on these parameters.
Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess and compare the optic nerve, retina, and retinal vessel parameters in recovered COVID-19 patients and healthy patients by using optical coherence tomography angiography (OCT-a). Methods: In all, 156 eyes of post-COVID-19 patients and 98 eyes of subjects from a control group were enrolled in our study. BCVA, intra ocular pressure (IOP) measurement, fundus examination, and OCT images, including macular cube, OCT-RNFL, and angio-OCT 6 x 6 mm examinations, were performed for both groups. The measurements were acquired using Swept Source OCT DRI OCT Triton. In the post-COVID-19 group, 762 OCT protocols were obtained. For statistical analysis, parameters from only one eye from each subject were taken. Results: In the measured parameters, no significant differences were observed, i.e., central macular thickness (p = 0.249); RNFL (p = 0.104); FAZ (p = 0.63); and vessel density of superficial retinal vascular plexus in central (p = 0.799), superior (p = 0.767), inferior (p = 0.526), nasal (p = 0.402), and temporal (p = 0.582) quadrants. Furthermore, a slit-lamp examination did not reveal any COVID-19-related abnormalities. Conclusion: OCT examination did not detect any significant changes in morphology or morphometry of the optic nerve, retina, or the retina vessels due to COVID-19.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available