September 2016
Volume 57, Issue 12
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2016
Diagnosing senile Retinoschisis, SD-OCT versus ultrasound echography examination
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Arne Bringewatt
    Department of Ophthalmology, Klinikum rechts der Isar , Munich, Germany
  • Sophie Burzer
    Department of Ophthalmology, Klinikum rechts der Isar , Munich, Germany
  • Nikolaus Feucht
    Department of Ophthalmology, Klinikum rechts der Isar , Munich, Germany
  • Chris P. lohmann
    Department of Ophthalmology, Klinikum rechts der Isar , Munich, Germany
  • Mathias M Maier
    Department of Ophthalmology, Klinikum rechts der Isar , Munich, Germany
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Arne Bringewatt, None; Sophie Burzer, None; Nikolaus Feucht, None; Chris lohmann, None; Mathias Maier, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science September 2016, Vol.57, 4266. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Arne Bringewatt, Sophie Burzer, Nikolaus Feucht, Chris P. lohmann, Mathias M Maier; Diagnosing senile Retinoschisis, SD-OCT versus ultrasound echography examination. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2016;57(12):4266.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : To identify senile retinoschisis (sRS) in retina lesions a SD-OCT examination seems reliable (Stehouwer, Tan et al. 2014). Compared to ultrasound echography (UEG) examination the value of SD-OCT examination in diagnosing sRS was evaluated retrospectively.

Methods : We analyzed the diagnostic results of 33 eyes (visus mean=0.8; SD=0.25; 77.8% hypermetropic) with sRS. All patients (equal sex; age mean=69.5 years; SD=8.6) had undergone UEG and SD-OCT examination (SPECTRALIS® Heidelberg Engineering) of the retinal region of interest (RoI).

Results : SD-OCT examination finds sRS in 29 eyes (87.9%). UEG examination identifies 26 eyes (78.8%) as sRS ones. In 22 (66.7%; n=33) cases both methods showed the same result, declaring eyes as sRS ones. In 7 eyes (21.2%; n=33;) sRS was identified by SD-OCT and not by UEG examination. UEG examination found sRS in 4 eyes (12.1%; n=33), of which SD-OCT scans were not useful. In 75% (3 eyes; n=4) of those cases the RoI was not within reach of SD-OCT scans. Most cases of sRS were located temporal (22 eyes; 66.7%; N=33). Of all the SD-OCT scans that did not identify sRS it was located in the temporal periphery. However, there was no correlation between location of sRS and results of both methods (p>0.05; Yates correction=0.02). 27 SD-OCT scans (81.8%; n=33) provided reasonable quality to identify split layer or fibers in between. In most SD-OCT scans (74.1%; n=27) the outer plexiform layer was identified as split layer of sRS.

Conclusions : In 66.7% of all cases the diagnosis of sRS was found no matter whether UEG or SD-OCT examination was performed. In 33.3% the combination of both methods was necessary to verify sRS. The advantage of SD-OCT examination was found in those cases where both individual methods showed different results. 63.6% of those cases were diagnosed by SD-OCT examination alone. Additionally, SD-OCT scans showed typical features of sRS (fibers, split layer). Based on these data, we recommend the use of SD-OCT in addition to UEG examination to improve the reliability of the diagnosis.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2016 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Seattle, Wash., May 1-5, 2016.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×