4.3 Article

Pachydrusen in polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy in an Indian cohort

Journal

INDIAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
Volume 67, Issue 7, Pages 1121-+

Publisher

WOLTERS KLUWER MEDKNOW PUBLICATIONS
DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1757_18

Keywords

Choroidal thickness (CT); large choroidal vessel thickness (LCVT); optical coherence tomography (OCT); pachydrusen; polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV); soft drusen

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To report the prevalence of pachydrusen and their relationship with subfoveal choroidal thickness (SFCT) and large choroidal vessel layer thickness (SF-LCVT) in eyes with polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV) and their fellow eyes. Methods: The case records of 50 patients (99 eyes; 59 PCV and 40 fellow eyes) were retrospectively analyzed for the presence of pachydrusen and other drusen types such as soft drusen. The diagnosis was established using colour fundus photography and optical coherence tomography (OCT). SFCT and SF-LCVT were measured and correlated with the different types of drusen. Results: The mean age of the study cohort was 62.26 +/- 10.67 years and included 27 males and 23 females. Pachydrusen and soft drusen were seen in 14 (PCV: 8 and fellow eyes: 6) and 8 eyes (PCV: 2 and fellow eyes: 6) respectively. The mean SFCT and SF-LCVT in the eyes with and without pachydrusen was not significanty different (280.29 +/- 103.11 mu vs. 292.63 +/- 87.17 mu; P = 0.63 and 180.57 +/- 59.20 vs. 173.73 +/- 54.86 mu; P = 0.67, respectively). The pachydrusen were most commonly located near the vascular arcades and showed scattered distribution pattern. Though SFCT and SF-LCVT was lower in the eyes with soft drusen compared to eyes with pachydrusen, it failed to reach statistical significance (SFCT, P = 0.1 and SF-LCVT, P = 0.06). Conclusion: The prevalence of pachydrusen in PCV and their fellow eyes is lower in Indian population suggestive of ethnic variations. SFCT and SF-LCVT was not noted to vary signifcantly in eyes with and without pachydrusen in this study cohort.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available