Cargando…

The Fovea-Protective Impact of Double-Layer Sign in Eyes With Foveal-Sparing Geographic Atrophy and Age-Related Macular Degeneration

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of double-layer sign (DLS) on geographic atrophy (GA) progression in eyes with foveal-sparing GA and age-related macular degeneration (AMD). METHODS: This is a retrospective, consecutive case series of eyes with foveal-sparing GA secon...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fukuyama, Hisashi, Huang, Bonnie Bertha, BouGhanem, Ghazi, Fawzi, Amani A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9554267/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36201174
http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/iovs.63.11.4
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of double-layer sign (DLS) on geographic atrophy (GA) progression in eyes with foveal-sparing GA and age-related macular degeneration (AMD). METHODS: This is a retrospective, consecutive case series of eyes with foveal-sparing GA secondary to AMD with more than 6 months of follow-up. The size of the foveal-sparing area was measured on the fundus autofluorescence images at the first and last visits. Each eye was evaluated for the presence or absence of DLS inside the foveal-sparing area. We graded eyes based on the presence of DLS within the foveal-sparing area and compared the progression of GA between two groups (DLS (+) versus DLS (−)). RESULTS: We identified 25 eyes with foveal-sparing GA with at least 2 follow-up visits (average interval = 22.7 ± 11.8 months between visits). The mean foveal sparing area was 1.74 ± 0.87 mm(2) (range = 0.42–4.14 mm(2)) at baseline and 1.26 ± 0.75 mm(2) (range = 0.25–2.92 mm(2)) at the last visit. Seventeen eyes (65.3%) were graded as DLS (+) within the foveal-sparing area. Square root progression of GA toward the fovea was significantly faster in the DLS (−) eyes (0.149 ± 0.078 mm/year) compared to the DLS (+) group (0.088 ± 0.052 mm/year; P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The DLS (−) group showed significantly faster centripetal GA progression than the DLS (+) group. Our data suggest that the presence of DLS in the spared foveal area could be a protective factor against foveal progression of GA in eyes with AMD.