ArticleBMC ophthalmology2024
91-month follow-up of solitary punctate chorioretinitis in a Chinese patient.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinical characteristics and prognosis of solitary punctate chorioretinitis in Chinese patients.International journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSolitary Punctate Chorioretinitis (SPC) is a recently identified form of punctate inner choroidopathy (PIC) characterized by a single lesion in the fovea of the macula. Previous studies with a maximum follow-up of 48 months were insufficient. Our review uncovered a case sustained for 91 months. CASE PRESENTATION: A 28-year-old young woman experienced with sudden visual loss in her right eye. Comprehensive examinations, including assessment of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), slit-lamp biomicroscopy, noncontact tonometry, fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA), fundus autofluorescence (FAF), optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA), perimetry, and microperimetry, were conducted. Over 91 months, the lesion slightly enlarged, remained yellow-white and punctate, and stayed in the central macula of the posterior pole. OCT images depicted subsidence in the inner nuclear layer (INL), the outer plexiform layer (OPL), photoreceptor layer, and disruption of the external limiting membrane (ELM), ellipsoid zone, and retinal pigment epithelium (RPE)/Bruch's membrane complex. Retinal herniation, focal choroidal excavation (FCE), and abnormal vessels in the choriocapillaris were noted. At the slab of the choriocapillaris, OCTA demonstrated that the lesion resembled a linear vascular structure, distinct from the structure of normal choriocapillaris. This confirmed the lesion as an abnormal vascular formation. FAF revealed a punctate hypo-autofluorescence lesion and abnormal hyper-autofluorescence near the optic disc and macula. FFA demonstrated a punctate hyper-fluorescent lesion inferotemporal to the fovea. The vascular structure remained stable without fluid exudation on OCT images, hence anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) treatment was not administered. Visual acuity improved from counting fingers to 0.07 in 52 days, reached 0.6 after 15 months, remained at 0.6 from 56 to 80 months, and returned to 0.8 after 91 months, although accompanied by local scotomas. The lesion pattern slightly enlarged without scarring.
conclusionsThroughout long-term follow-up, we had long suspected the presence of choroidal neovascularization (CNV) and found the FCE in the last visit. Eventually, we concluded that SPC could potentially constitute a distinct subtype of PIC. The patient received no treatment, and vision recovered to 0.8. If CNV is suspected in SPC, anti-VEGF treatment may not be necessary without activity on OCT, but close monitoring is essential.
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.