4.6 Article

Disease Course of Patients with Unilateral Pigmentary Retinopathy

Journal

INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE
Volume 52, Issue 12, Pages 9244-9249

Publisher

ASSOC RESEARCH VISION OPHTHALMOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.11-7892

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. National Eye Institute [EY00169, EY019767]
  2. The Foundation Fighting Blindness (Columbia, MD)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PURPOSE. To evaluate the change in ocular function by eye in patients with unilateral pigmentary retinopathy. METHODS. Longitudinal regression was used to estimate mean exponential rates of change in Goldmann visual field area (V4e white test light) and in full-field electroretinogram (ERG) amplitudes to 0.5- and 30-Hz white flashes in 15 patients with unilateral pigmentary retinopathy. Snellen visual acuity was assessed case by case. RESULTS. Mean annual rates of change for the affected eyes were -4.9% for visual field area, -4.7% for ERG amplitude to 0.5-Hz flashes, and -4.6% for ERG amplitude to 30-Hz flashes. All three rates were faster than the corresponding age-related rates of change for the fellow normal eyes (P = 0.0006, P = 0.003, P = 0.03, respectively). An initial cone ERG implicit time to 30-Hz flashes in affected eyes >= 40 ms predicted a faster mean rate of decline of visual field area and of ERG amplitude to 0.5- and 30-Hz flashes (P < 0.0001 for all three measures). The visual acuity of affected eyes was more likely to decrease in patients presenting at >35 years of age than in patients presenting at a younger age (P = 0.0004). CONCLUSIONS. The affected eye in unilateral pigmentary retinopathy shows a progressive loss of peripheral retinal function that cannot be attributed to aging alone and that is faster in eyes with a more prolonged initial cone ERG implicit time. Patients presenting at >35 years of age are at greater risk for losing visual acuity. (Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52:9244-9249) DOI: 10.1167/iovs.11-7892

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available