4.1 Article

Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Defect Associated With Progressive Myopia

Journal

JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA
Volume 32, Issue 7, Pages E103-E105

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000002201

Keywords

paravascular inner retinal defects; progressive myopia; retinal nerve fiber layer

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study reports a case of bilateral paravascular inner retinal defects (PIRDs) that enlarge with progressive myopia. These defects have different structural characteristics compared to glaucomatous retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) defects. The inner retinal layers deeper than the RNFL were found to be cleaved and enlarged in both eyes along with progressive myopia and axial elongation over an 8-year follow-up period. Therefore, PIRDs that develop and enlarge with progressive myopia and axial elongation in childhood should be differentiated from the widening of RNFL defects seen in glaucoma progression.
Purpose:The purpose of this study was to report a case with bilateral paravascular inner retinal defects (PIRDs) enlarging with progressive myopia, which had different structural characteristics from the glaucomatous retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) defect. Patients and Methods:A 10-year-old girl with high myopia was referred to a glaucoma clinic for evaluation of RNFL defects shown in color fundus photographs. Fundus photographs and optical coherence tomography examinations were serially reviewed to examine the changes in the RNFL. Results:Cleavage of inner retinal layers involving the layers deeper than the RNFL was identified in optical coherence tomography, which appeared and enlarged in both eyes along with progressive myopia and axial elongation during the follow-up period of 8 years. Conclusions:PIRD developed and enlarged with progressive myopia and axial elongation in childhood. It should be differentiated from the widening of RNFL defect shown with glaucoma progression.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available