Global Search

Search articles, concepts, and chapters

Graefes Arch Clin Exp OphthalmolJune 20181 citations

Long-term follow-up of retinal nerve fiber layer cleavages in glaucoma patients and suspects.

Hsia Yun, Su Chien-Chia, Wang Tsing-Hong, Yang Chung-May, Huang Jehn-Yu


AI Summary

Long-term study of retinal nerve fiber layer cleavages in glaucoma patients/suspects found no detectable structural or functional progression, suggesting they may not indicate worsening glaucoma.

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate the structural and functional characteristics and change of the retinal nerve fiber layer cleavages (RNFLCs) in glaucoma patients and suspects in long-term follow-up.

Methods

This is a retrospective longitudinal study. Within 43 eyes of 30 subjects, 62 RNFLC locations were detected on color fundus photography. Basic ophthalmic examinations, color fundus photography, optical coherence tomography (OCT), and visual field (VF) test were performed in 6-month intervals. Clinical characteristics and the structural and functional changes of the cleaved areas were analyzed.

Results

RNFLC and localized vitreoretinal traction occurred most commonly along the superotemporal retinal vessel arcade. Nine locations had corresponding defects on OCT deviation map, while 31 locations were associated with defects on OCT deviation map. Three locations had corresponding VF defects. More of the non-highly myopic eyes had lamellar hole than the highly myopes (p = 0.038). The RNFLC lesions in glaucomatous eyes were more frequently associated with OCT defects on deviation map (p = 0.021). There was no difference in the presence of lamellar hole or the number of RNFLCs between the glaucomatous and non-glaucomatous eyes. During a 66.8 ± 37.8-month follow-up, there was no structural or functional progression of the RNFLCs as determined by color fundus photography, VF test, and GPA of OCT interpreted by three ophthalmologists. There was no statistically significant change of RNFLC area (p = 0.268).

Conclusions

RNFLC did not show detectable functional or structural change in early glaucoma patients and suspects after long-term follow-up.


MeSH Terms

AdolescentAdultAgedDisease ProgressionFollow-Up StudiesGlaucomaHumansIntraocular PressureMiddle AgedNerve FibersOptic DiskRetinal Ganglion CellsRetrospective StudiesTime FactorsTomography, Optical CoherenceVisual AcuityVisual FieldsYoung Adult

Key Concepts6

Retinal nerve fiber layer cleavages (RNFLCs) in glaucoma patients and suspects did not show detectable functional or structural change after a 66.8 ± 37.8-month follow-up, as determined by color fundus photography, VF test, and GPA of OCT interpreted by three ophthalmologists.

PrognosisCohortRetrospective Longitudinal Studyn=43 eyes of 30 subjects with 62 RNFLC …Ch5Ch6Ch11

RNFLCs and localized vitreoretinal traction occurred most commonly along the superotemporal retinal vessel arcade in glaucoma patients and suspects.

DiagnosisCohortRetrospective Longitudinal Studyn=43 eyes of 30 subjects with 62 RNFLC …Ch5

Nine RNFLC locations had corresponding defects on OCT deviation map, while 31 locations were associated with defects on OCT deviation map, and three locations had corresponding VF defects in glaucoma patients and suspects.

DiagnosisCohortRetrospective Longitudinal Studyn=43 eyes of 30 subjects with 62 RNFLC …Ch5Ch6

More of the non-highly myopic eyes had lamellar hole than the highly myopic eyes (p = 0.038) among glaucoma patients and suspects with RNFLCs.

PrognosisCohortRetrospective Longitudinal Studyn=43 eyes of 30 subjects with 62 RNFLC …Ch5

RNFLC lesions in glaucomatous eyes were more frequently associated with OCT defects on deviation map (p = 0.021) compared to non-glaucomatous eyes.

DiagnosisCohortRetrospective Longitudinal Studyn=43 eyes of 30 subjects with 62 RNFLC …Ch5

There was no difference in the presence of lamellar hole or the number of RNFLCs between glaucomatous and non-glaucomatous eyes.

DiagnosisCohortRetrospective Longitudinal Studyn=43 eyes of 30 subjects with 62 RNFLC …Ch5

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