4.6 Article

Characteristics of retinal pigment clumps in Type 2 macular telangiectasia (MacTel)

期刊

EYE
卷 37, 期 6, 页码 1061-1066

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41433-022-02065-8

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study aimed to assess the relationship between retinal pigment clump (RPC) size and location with visual acuity and retinal neovascularisation in eyes with type 2 macular telangiectasia (MacTel). The results showed that female gender, larger pigment size, and its location above the outer plexiform layer were associated with poor vision and proliferative disease.
Objective To assess the relationship of retinal pigment clump (RPC) size and its location with visual acuity and retinal neovascularisation in eyes with type 2 macular telangiectasia (MacTel). Methods In this cross-sectional study, eyes diagnosed with type 2 MacTel showing RPC were included. Area occupied by pigment was measured on the multicolour image using the area tool on the Spectralis, Heidelberg machine. Pigment location within retinal layers was noted with OCT. Analysis was performed to identify factors associated with poor vision and proliferative disease. Results Sixty-two eyes of 42 patients diagnosed with type 2 MacTel and RPC were included. The mean age was 64.31 +/- 10.19 years. There were 13 (31%) males and 29 (69%) females in the study. 74% of patients were diabetics and the mean logMAR visual acuity of the participants was 0.619 +/- 0.359. Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression analysis identified female gender (p = 0.026), increasing RPC size (p = 0.008) and its presence above the outer plexiform layer (p = 0.006) to be associated with poor vision and proliferative disease in type 2 MacTel. Conclusion Our data identified female gender, larger pigment size and its location above the OPL to be associated with poor vision and proliferative disease. This data may be useful for further improving the current system for staging disease severity in type 2 MacTel.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据