4.7 Article

The Association of Pachydrusen Characteristics with Choroidal Thickness and Patient's Age in Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy versus Central Serous Chorioretinopathy

Journal

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms23158353

Keywords

central serous chorioretinopathy; choroid; pachydrusen; polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigated the relationship between pachydrusen and choroidal thickness and age in eyes with polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV) and eyes with central serous chorioretinopathy (CSC). The presence of pachydrusen was more frequent in PCV eyes compared to CSC eyes, and subfoveal choroidal thickness was associated with pachydrusen in PCV eyes while age was associated with pachydrusen in CSC eyes.
We investigated the relationship between pachydrusen and choroidal thickness and age in eyes with polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV) and fellow eyes, compared to eyes with central serous chorioretinopathy (CSC). This retrospective study included 89 eyes with PCV and 146 eyes with CSC. The number, location, and shape of the pachydrusen and their association with choroidal thickness and age were analyzed. PCV eyes showed pachydrusen more frequently than eyes with CSC (52% vs. 20%, p < 0.001). Large solitary type and clustered type were more frequent in PCV eyes compared to CSC eyes (p = 0.003 and p = 0.001, respectively). Subfoveal choroidal thickness was associated with pachydrusen in eyes with PCV (odds ratio [OR] 1.006, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.001-1.011, p = 0.027), while age was associated with pachydrusen in CSC eyes (OR 1.137, 95% CI, 1.073-1.205; p < 0.001). Pachydrusen were localized directly over the pachyvessel on optical coherence tomographic findings in approximately two thirds of PCV eyes and fellow eyes (62% and 67%, respectively). Risk factors for pachydrusen differ according to diseases. The presence of pachydrusen was associated with choroidal thickness in PCV, while the association with age was more prominent in CSC.

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