Global Search

Search articles, concepts, and chapters

Br J OphthalmolAugust 20150 citations

Risk of optic pathway glioma in children with neurofibromatosis type 1 and optic nerve tortuosity or nerve sheath thickening.

Levin Marc H, Armstrong Gregory T, Broad Julian H, Zimmerman Robert, Bilaniuk Larissa T, Feygin Tamara, Li Yimei, Liu Grant T, Fisher Michael J


AI Summary

Optic nerve tortuosity in NF-1 children predicts OPG development, but not vision loss. Nerve/sheath thickening does not predict OPG. This helps identify high-risk patients for monitoring.

Abstract

Background/aims: Optic nerve tortuosity and nerve and sheath thickening are observed on MRI in some patients with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF-1). This study aimed to determine if tortuosity and thickening are associated with the development of optic pathway glioma (OPG) and subsequent vision loss.

Methods

Children with NF-1 who underwent brain MRI between 1992 and 2005, and had at least 1 year of subsequent visual acuity (VA) follow-up, were identified retrospectively. The baseline MRI was independently reviewed by three neuroradiologists for consensus assessment. Tortuosity was identified using validated operational criteria. Optic nerve and sheath thicknesses and VA at last follow-up were directly measured.

Results

Of 132 evaluable children, seven (5%) had tortuosity on baseline MRI. 20 subjects (15%) ultimately developed OPG at a median of 1.9 years (range 7 months-8.0 years) following the baseline MRI. Subjects with tortuosity were significantly more likely to develop OPG than those without tortuosity (57% vs 13%, p=0.01). In subjects who developed OPG, the prevalence of tumour-related vision loss was not significantly different between those with and without baseline tortuosity (14% vs 4%, p=0.28). No difference existed between mean baseline optic nerve (2.3 vs 2.2 mm) or sheath (5.2 vs 5.4 mm) thicknesses comparing subjects who did and did not develop OPG.

Conclusions

Optic nerve tortuosity at baseline is associated with OPG development among patients with NF-1, but does not predispose to aggressive OPG with associated vision loss. Neither nerve nor sheath thickening at baseline is associated with OPG development.


MeSH Terms

AdolescentChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMyelin SheathNeurofibromatosis 1Optic NerveOptic Nerve GliomaOptic Nerve NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsVisual AcuityVisual Pathways

Key Concepts5

In children with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF-1), optic nerve tortuosity at baseline was significantly associated with the development of optic pathway glioma (OPG) (57% vs 13%, p=0.01) in a retrospective cohort study of 132 evaluable children.

PrognosisCohortRetrospective Cohortn=132 evaluable childrenCh9Ch10

In children with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF-1) who developed optic pathway glioma (OPG), the prevalence of tumor-related vision loss was not significantly different between those with and without baseline optic nerve tortuosity (14% vs 4%, p=0.28) in a retrospective cohort study of 132 evaluable children.

PrognosisCohortRetrospective Cohortn=132 evaluable childrenCh9Ch10

In children with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF-1), no significant difference existed between mean baseline optic nerve thickness (2.3 vs 2.2 mm) or sheath thickness (5.2 vs 5.4 mm) when comparing subjects who did and did not develop optic pathway glioma (OPG) in a retrospective cohort study of 132 evaluable children.

PrognosisCohortRetrospective Cohortn=132 evaluable childrenCh9Ch10

Of 132 evaluable children with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF-1), seven (5%) had optic nerve tortuosity on baseline MRI in a retrospective cohort study.

EpidemiologyCohortRetrospective Cohortn=132 evaluable childrenCh10

Among 132 evaluable children with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF-1), 20 subjects (15%) ultimately developed optic pathway glioma (OPG) at a median of 1.9 years (range 7 months-8.0 years) following baseline MRI in a retrospective cohort study.

EpidemiologyCohortRetrospective Cohortn=132 evaluable childrenCh10

Is this article assigned to the wrong chapter(s)? Let us know.