4.6 Article

Aqueous humor levels of vascular endothelial growth factor and pigment epithelium-derived factor in polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy and choroidal neovascularization

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
Volume 141, Issue 3, Pages 456-462

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2005.10.012

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PURPOSE: To determine the aqueous levels of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and pigment epithelium-derived factor (PEDF) in patients with active polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV) and choroidal neovascularization (CNV) secondary to age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and pathologic myopia. DESIGN: Prospective, comparative control study. METHODS: Aqueous humors were collected from 32 eyes of 32 patients for either active PCV or CNV. Among them, 11 eyes had active and symptomatic PCV, 12 eyes had active CNV secondary to AMD, and nine eyes had active CNV of pathologic myopia. Levels of VEGF and PEDF were determined by commercially available enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kits. A group of 10 aqueous samples from 10 patients who underwent cataract surgery without other ocular or systemic diseases comprised the controls. RESULTS: VEGF concentrations in aqueous humor were markedly increased in patients with PCV, CNV of AMD, and CNV of myopia when compared with the controls (analysis of variance [ANOVAI, P <.001). VEGF levels in eyes with PCV were, however, significantly lower than those of exudative AMD (P =.045). The PEDF levels were also significantly different among the groups (ANOVA, P =.001), and we observed increased levels in PCV, CNV of AMD, and CNV of myopia. CONCLUSIONS: VEGF and PEDF factors were coexpressed and increased with positive correlation in aqueous humor of eyes with active PCV. The different levels of both factors in eyes of PCV and AMD might suggest distinct clinical entities or different angiogenesis courses between PCV and AMD.

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