4.6 Article

Morphologic Characterization of Dome-Shaped Macula in Myopic Eyes With Serous Macular Detachment

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
卷 156, 期 5, 页码 958-967

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2013.06.032

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PURPOSE: To analyze dome-shaped maculas topographic features and related serous retinal detachment (SRD) in eyes with myopic staphyloma. DESIGN: Retrospective, observational case series. METHODS: We reviewed the records of 48 eyes in 33 patients with dome-shaped maculas who were referred because of decreased vision. Ophthalmologic examination included axial length measurement, spectral domain optical. coherence tomography (OCT), and fluorescein and indocyanine green angiography. The height of the macular bulge was measured, and the choroidal thickness was mapped. RESULTS: Patient mean age was 55.0 +/- 13.6 years. Mean axial length was 27.49 +/- 2.53 mm. Mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was 0.50 +/- 0.33 logMAR. Three dome-shaped macula patterns were observed: round dome in 10/48 (20.8%) eyes; horizontal oval-shaped dome in 30/48 (62.5%) eyes; and vertical oval-shaped dome in 8/48 (16.7%) eyes. The mean macular bulge height was 407.7 +/- 215.1 mu m (120-1130) and was significantly greater in vertical oval-shaped domes. The mean central choroidal thickness (CCT) was 146.5 +/- 56.0 mu m, significantly greater than at 3 mm nasal and temporal to the fovea (P < 0.0001). The CCT was positively correlated to macular bulge height but not to BCVA. Foveal SRD was present in 25/48 eyes and significantly increased for macular bulge height greater than 350 mu m (P = 0.0047). BCVA was significantly lower when SRD was present (P = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: Most dome-shaped maculas did not display a round but a horizontal or vertical oval-shaped dome and could be missed on a single OCT scan. Chronic foveal SRD was associated with decreased vision and was more common when the macular bulge was highly elevated. (C) 2013 by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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