ArticleInternational ophthalmology2018
Classification and characterization of acute macular neuroretinopathy with spectral domain optical coherence tomography.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optical coherence tomography angiography suggests choriocapillaris perfusion deficit as etiology of acute macular neuroretinopathy.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2024Article
- Multicenter and multimodal imaging study reveals rare fundus lesions in patients after SARS-CoV-2 infection.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Paracentral Acute Middle MaculopathyTurkish journal of ophthalmology · 2020Article
- Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography (OCT-A) in a Patient with Occult Retinal Dysfunction.Case reports in ophthalmological medicine · 2019Article
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 classify and characterize AMN lesions with SD-OCT during a follow-up as long as 5 years.
methodsRetrospective study of 14 patients (18 eyes) with special focus on SD-OCT. We measured thickness of inner nuclear layer (INL), outer retinal layer (ONL), and hyperreflective band at baseline and during follow-up. AMN lesions were classified as type 1 and type 2.
resultsOf 14 patients (six males, eight females, mean age 29.7 years), three patients (four eyes) had type 1 and nine (12 eyes) had type 2. Two patients did not meet the criteria for AMN type 1 or 2 and were therefore classified as new subtype of AMN. In all patients, statistically significant thinning of ONL and INL was observable. Mean ONL of all patients was 90.2 ± 7.81 and 72.3 ± 15.64 μm (p < 0.05) during follow-up; mean INL was 54.4 ± 10.71 and 37.5 ± 6.18 μm (p < 0.05) in the course. In the subgroup analysis in AMN type 2, the thinning of both ONL and INL was also statistically significant (mean ONL: 87.4 ± 6.02 and 71.6 ± 12.7 μm (p < 0.05); mean INL: 48.5 ± 5.04 and 38.5 ± 5.6 μm (p < 0.05)) in the course.
conclusionSD-OCT allows for classification, characterization, and further understanding of AMN lesions. Up to now, this is one of the largest AMN case series differentiating into different subtypes and following up for up to 5 years. Furthermore, we describe a new AMN subtype characterized by initially clinically visible yellowish parafoveal lesions, subtle pigmentary changes at late stage, lack of classic dark appearance on IR reflectance, involvement of RPE/Bruch's complex, and disruption of ellipsoid zone and interdigitation zone. The patients suffered from a prolonged visual impairment and paracentral scotomata. We propose the term AMN type 3 or "paracentral acute outer maculopathy."
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.