Diagnostic ability of confocal near-infrared reflectance fundus imaging to detect retrograde microcystic maculopathy from chiasm compression. A comparative study with OCT findings

Imagem de Miniatura
Arquivos
art_MONTEIRO_Diagnostic_ability_of_confocal_nearinfrared_reflectance_fundus_imaging_2021.PDF (3.41 MB)
Citações na Scopus
3
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2021
DOI
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
Autores
SOUSA, Rafael M.
FERRAZ, Daniel
SADIQ, Mohammad A.
NGUYEN, Quan D.
Citação
PLOS ONE, v.16, n.6, article ID e0253323, 15p, 2021
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Purpose To evaluate the ability of confocal near-infrared reflectance (NIR) to diagnose retrograde microcystic maculopathy (RMM) in eyes with temporal visual field (VF) loss and optic atrophy from chiasmal compression. To compare NIR findings with optical coherence tomography (OCT) findings in the same group of patients. Methods Thirty-four eyes (26 patients) with temporal VF loss from chiasmal compression and 41 healthy eyes (22 controls) underwent NIR fundus photography, and macular OCT scanning. VF loss was estimated and retinal layers thickness were measured on OCT. Two examiners blinded to the diagnosis randomly examined NIR images for the presence of hyporeflective abnormality (HA) and OCT scans for the presence of microcystic macular abnormalities (MMA). The total average and hemi-macular HA area and number of microcysts were determined. The groups were compared and the level of agreement was estimated. Results The OCT-measured macular retinal nerve fiber and ganglion cell layers were thinner and the inner nuclear layer was thicker in patients compared to controls. HA and MMA were detected in 22 and 12 patient eyes, respectively, and in 0 controls (p<0.001, both comparisons). HA was significantly more frequent than MMA in patients with optic atrophy, and agreement between HA and MMA (both total and hemi-macular) was fair (kappa range: 0.24-0.29). The mean HA area was significantly greater in the nasal than temporal hemi-macula. A re-analysis of the 14 eyes with discrepant findings allowed to confirm RMM in 20 eyes (20/34) indicating that OCT detected RMM in 12 and missed it in 8 eyes. On the other hand, NIR correctly detected 18 out of 20 eyes, overcalled 4 and missed 2. Conclusions RMM is a frequent finding in eyes with severe VF loss from long-standing chiasmal compression. NIR photography appears to be more sensitive than OCT for detecting RMM and may be useful as screening method for its presence.
Palavras-chave
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/41485
Referências
  1. Abdelfattah NS, 2020, AM J OPHTHALMOL, V212, P169, DOI 10.1016/j.ajo.2020.01.005
  2. Abegg M, 2014, OPHTHALMOLOGY, V121, P142, DOI 10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.08.045
  3. Balk LJ, 2012, BRAIN, V135, DOI 10.1093/brain/aws216
  4. Barboni P, 2013, BRAIN, V136, DOI 10.1093/brain/awt014
  5. Brazerol J, 2017, J GLAUCOMA, V26, P423, DOI 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000633
  6. Capobianco M, 2007, NEUROL SCI, V28, P209, DOI 10.1007/s10072-007-0823-z
  7. Carbonelli M, 2015, PLOS ONE, V10, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0127906
  8. Cunha LP, 2008, DOC OPHTHALMOL, V117, P223, DOI 10.1007/s10633-008-9126-9
  9. de Araujo RB, 2017, FRONT NEUROL, V8, DOI 10.3389/fneur.2017.00619
  10. Elsner AE, 1996, VISION RES, V36, P191, DOI 10.1016/0042-6989(95)00100-E
  11. Gelfand JM, 2012, BRAIN, V135, P1786, DOI 10.1093/brain/aws098
  12. Gills J P Jr, 1966, Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc, V64, P66
  13. Holz FG, 2017, OPHTHALMOLOGY, V124, P464, DOI 10.1016/j.ophtha.2016.12.002
  14. Kaufhold F, 2013, PLOS ONE, V8, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0071145
  15. Kaufhold F, 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0036965
  16. Kessel L, 2018, CLIN EXP OPHTHALMOL, V46, P1075, DOI 10.1111/ceo.13327
  17. Kisimbi J, 2013, BRAIN, V136, P3418, DOI 10.1093/brain/awt221
  18. Lamin A, 2019, EYE, V33, P428, DOI 10.1038/s41433-018-0234-9
  19. Monteiro MLR, 2007, EYE, V21, P16, DOI 10.1038/sj.eye.6702182
  20. Monteiro MLR, 2007, AM J OPHTHALMOL, V143, P896, DOI 10.1016/j.ajo.2006.11.054
  21. Monteiro MLR, 2014, INVEST OPHTH VIS SCI, V55, P3328, DOI 10.1167/iovs.14-14118
  22. Pott JWR, 2016, BRIT J OPHTHALMOL, V100, P216, DOI 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-305737
  23. Russakoff DB, 2020, TRANSL VIS SCI TECHN, V9, DOI 10.1167/tvst.9.2.12
  24. Saidha S, 2012, LANCET NEUROL, V11, P963, DOI 10.1016/S1474-4422(12)70213-2
  25. Sotirchos ES, 2013, NEUROLOGY, V80, P1406, DOI 10.1212/WNL.0b013e31828c2f7a
  26. Tewarie P, 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0034823
  27. UNSOLD R, 1980, ARCH OPHTHALMOL-CHIC, V98, P1637, DOI 10.1001/archopht.1980.01020040489020
  28. VANBUREN JM, 1963, J NEUROL NEUROSUR PS, V26, P402
  29. Wen JC, 2016, J GLAUCOMA, V25, P258, DOI 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000129
  30. Wolff B, 2013, RETINA-J RET VIT DIS, V33, P2133, DOI 10.1097/IAE.0b013e31828e68d0

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MOF
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/ICHC
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/33