ReviewMedical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal2026
Acute macular neuroretinopathy: is the name still appropriate?
Review in Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acute macular neuroretinopathy (AMN) is a rare but increasingly reported retinal disorder that predominantly affects young women and is characterized by acute-onset paracentral scotomas and distinctive parafoveal macular lesions. Following its first report in 1975 as an inner retinal disease, a considerable body of work has been produced, expanding on its clinical presentation and systemic associations. Aim of this review is to synthesize the current understanding of AMN, including existing controversies on nomenclature. Methods: A literature search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE for English-language articles published up to 31 July 2025. Search terms included "acute macular neuroretinopathy" and "acute macular outer retinopathy". Additional relevant sources were identified through manual screening of reference lists and targeted updating of the literature through 28 August 2025. Relevant articles were selected for inclusion in this narrative review based on the authors' judgment of relevance to the review aims. Results: Multiple cases of AMN in association with a variety of ocular and systemic conditions have been reported. Reported associations include viral illnesses such as influenza, Dengue fever, oral contraceptive use, vasoconstrictive agents, non-ocular trauma, and vaccination. An increased incidence of AMN was reported at a single center during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Advances in multimodal retinal imaging, particularly optical coherence tomography (OCT) and OCT angiography, have led to a more precise localization and insight into the pathogenesis of the disease in the outer retinal layers. These findings have prompted some authors to suggest renaming the condition acute macular outer retinopathy (AMOR) to better reflect the anatomical involvement. Conclusions: AMN appears to primarily affect the outer retinal layers, with current evidence suggesting a role for underlying vascular impairment in its pathogenesis. Although "AMOR" may offer a more anatomically precise description, AMN remains widely used in the academic literature and continues to be both appropriate and accepted. Further research is needed to elucidate the underlying pathophysiology, precisely localize the site of vascular impairment, and explore potential therapeutic strategies. In this context, consistent terminology is essential, and the continued use of the acronym "AMN" is supported by both clinical and historical considerations.
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.