ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2016
Functional assessment of the fundus autofluorescence pattern in Best vitelliform macular dystrophy.
Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Near-Infrared Autofluorescence: Early Detection of Retinal Pigment Epithelial Alterations in Inherited Retinal Dystrophies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Multimodal imaging in Best Vitelliform Macular Dystrophy: Literature review and novel insights.European journal of ophthalmology · 2024Review
- Retinal sensitivity and fundus autofluorescence in adult-onset foveomacular vitelliform dystrophy.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Photoreceptor Function and Structure in Autosomal Dominant Vitelliform Macular Dystrophy Caused by BEST1 Mutations.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2022Article
- Clinical Correlation Between Optical Coherence Tomography Biomarkers and Retinal Sensitivity in Best Vitelliform Macular Dystrophy.Translational vision science & technology · 2022Observational
- Disease expression caused by different variants in the BEST1 gene: genotype and phenotype findings in bestrophinopathies.Acta ophthalmologica · 2022Article
- Reviewing the Role of Ultra-Widefield Imaging in Inherited Retinal Dystrophies.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2020Review
- Natural course of the vitelliform stage in best vitelliform macular dystrophy: a five-year follow-up study.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2020Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo identify the fundus autofluorescence (FAF) patterns in Best vitelliform macular dystrophy (VMD).
methodsPatients affected by VMD in vitelliform, pseudohypopyon, and vitelliruptive stages underwent a complete ophthalmological examination, including best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), short-wavelength FAF (SW-FAF), near-infrared FAF (NIR-FAF) and microperimetry.
main outcome measuresthe identification of the correlation between SW-FAF and NIR-FAF patterns of the foveal region with BCVA, and central retinal sensitivity in eyes affected by VMD. The secondary outcomes included the definition of the frequency of foveal patterns on SW-FAF and NIR-FAF.
resultsThirty-seven of 64 (58 %), 8 of 64 (12.5 %) and 19 of 64 (29.5 %) eyes showed vitelliform, pseudohypopyon, and vitelliruptive stages respectively. Three main FAF patterns were identified on both techniques: hyper-autofluorescent pattern, hypo-autofluorescent pattern, and patchy pattern. BCVA was significantly different in eyes with hypo-autofluorescent and patchy patterns with respect to eyes showing a hyper-autofluorescent pattern. Similar differences were registered in the FS according to SW-FAF classification. However, the FS differed in each subgroup in the NIR-FAF analysis. Subgroup analyses were performed on the patchy pattern, combining FAF and fundus abnormalities. Considering both FAF techniques, the BCVA differed between the vitelliform and pseudohypopyon stages, and between the vitelliform and vitelliruptive stages. In the NIR-FAF classification, there was a significant statistical difference in the FS between each subgroup; in the SW-FAF, there was a significant difference between the vitelliform and pseudohypopyon stages and the vitelliform and vitelliruptive stages.
conclusionsThree main FAF patterns can be identified in VMD. The patchy pattern is the most frequent, accounting for 70 % of eyes on SW-FAF and 80 % of eyes on NIR-FAF. A tighter correlation links the classification of NIR-FAF patterns and FS. Longitudinal investigations are warranted to evaluate the course of FAF patterns and their role in disease monitoring.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.