Clinical features, treatment factors, and long-term outcomes of optic disc pit maculopathy

Purpose To assess the clinical features, treatment factors, and long-term visual and anatomical outcomes of optic disc pit maculopathy (ODPM) in Korean patients. Methods Consecutive patients diagnosed between January 2000 and September 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. The primary outcome was best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and anatomical changes (determined by macular thickness reduction and fluid resorption). Secondary outcomes included factors associated with poor visual outcomes (> 3-line decrease or < 20/200 vision). Results Of the 24 eyes (24 patients, mean age, 42.8 years) in this study, two peak incidence groups were noted: children younger than 14 years (six patients; mean age, 9.7 years) and middle-aged adults (18 patients; 53.8 years). There were no significant differences between groups in terms of clinical features, treatment, and outcomes (P > 0.05). The primary treatment involved immediate (7 eyes) or delayed (9) vitrectomy, laser only (2), or observation only (6). Good (50%) or partial (33%) anatomical response was noted in most cases at the final follow-up (P > 0.05). However, regression analyses showed that poor visual outcomes were associated with low preoperative BCVA (OR, 8.73; 95%CI, 1.34-56.85; P = 0.023) and delayed vitrectomy (OR, 13.00; 95%CI, 1.70-99.38; P = 0.013), while presence of intraretinal fluid in the inner and outer layers reduced the risk (OR, 0.086; 95%CI, 0.01-0.88; P = 0.039). Conclusion Patients with ODPM may have two peak incidence groups with similar clinical features and treatment outcomes, supporting the idea of heterogeneous mechanisms triggering fluid accumulation. Although the primary treatment choice may not impact long-term anatomical outcomes, delayed vitrectomy may be associated with poorer visual outcomes.

Automated summary

This study evaluated the clinical features, treatment factors, and long-term outcomes of optic disc pit maculopathy in Korean patients. Two peak incidence groups were identified, and the primary treatment choice did not significantly impact anatomical outcomes. However, delayed vitrectomy was associated with poorer visual outcomes.