Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2019 Sep;3(9):760-766.
doi: 10.1016/j.oret.2019.04.005. Epub 2019 Apr 10.

Impact and Implication of Fovea-Involving Intraretinal Hemorrhage after Acute Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Impact and Implication of Fovea-Involving Intraretinal Hemorrhage after Acute Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion

James H Powers et al. Ophthalmol Retina. 2019 Sep.

Abstract

Purpose: To compare clinical outcomes in patients with branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) with (group A) or without (group B) fovea-involving intraretinal hemorrhage (IRH).

Design: Retrospective cohort study.

Participants: All patients diagnosed with acute, treatment-naive BRVO seen by the Duke Eye Center Retina Service from January 1, 2009, through June 30, 2017 who had treatment-naive BRVO with disease onset <3 months before presentation, macular involvement, spectral-domain OCT and color fundus photographs at presentation, and >12 months offollow-up.

Methods: Retrospective study using a database of patients diagnosed with BRVO over an 8-year period. The presence of fovea-involving IRH was determined from baseline fundus photographs by human graders and confirmed with multimodal imaging. Presenting features, treatment patterns, and clinical outcomes were compared.

Main outcome measures: Visual acuity (VA), cystoid macular edema (CME), central subfield thickness (CST), and number of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections.

Results: Of 172 patients with BRVO, 33 (19.2%) presented with fovea-involving IRH. At presentation, group A had worse VA (0.54±0.06 logMAR [Snellen equivalent, 20/69] vs. 0.34±0.03 logMAR [Snellen equivalent, 20/44]; P = 0.001), greater CST (523.8±32 μm vs. 345.9±11.8 μm; P < 0.001), were more likely to have CME (93.9% vs. 48.2%; P < 0.001), and received more anti-VEGF injections in the first year (4.50±3.43 vs. 1.89±3.26; P < 0.001) than group B. Final VA was worse in group A (0.57±0.12 logMAR [Snellen equivalent, 20/74] vs. 0.35±0.05 logMAR [Snellen equivalent, 20/45]; P = 0.05). More patients in group A had loss of >2 lines of VA (36.4% vs. 18.7%; P = 0.04) or >3 lines (27.3% vs. 10.8%; P = 0.05) at final follow-up. Group A was more likely to have CME (63.6% vs. 27.3%; P < 0.001) at final follow-up with greater treatment burden, yet experienced a greater decrease in CST (-197.8±45.3 μm vs. -51.7±14.7 μm; P = 0.005).

Conclusions: Acute BRVO presenting with fovea-involving IRH is associated with worse presenting features, greater treatment burden, and worse clinical outcomes despite current therapeutic interventions.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances

LinkOut - more resources