May 2007
Volume 48, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2007
Ocular Phenotype Comparison Between Patients With Bardet-Biedl Syndrome With Identified BBS1 and BBS10 Mutations
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • E. Heon
    Ophthalmology & Vision Sciences, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • C. Gerth
    Ophthalmology & Vision Sciences, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • Y. Elia
    Ophthalmology & Vision Sciences, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • F. Munier
    Hospital Ophthalmique, Universite de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships E. Heon, None; C. Gerth, None; Y. Elia, None; F. Munier, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support FFB Canada, Sickkids RI Restracomp Fund
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2007, Vol.48, 3698. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      E. Heon, C. Gerth, Y. Elia, F. Munier; Ocular Phenotype Comparison Between Patients With Bardet-Biedl Syndrome With Identified BBS1 and BBS10 Mutations. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2007;48(13):3698.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose:: To investigate and compare the ocular phenotype and its natural history of patients with Bardet-Biedl Syndrome (BBS), who are carrier of BBS1 mutation to those with BBS10 mutation.

Methods:: Longitudinal ocular function and morphology was assessed in patients with homozygous or compound heterozygous mutation in the BBS 1 and BBS 10. EDTRS visual acuity (VA), ISCEV standard full-field electroretinogram (ERG), refractive error and grade of maculopathy were compared for the two patient groups.

Results:: 14 patients (10 females, 4 males) equally divided for BBS1 and BBS10 were included. All except 3 patients with BBS1 mutations were compound heterozygous. Mean follow up time was 9.9 yrs (BBS1) and 5.2 yrs (BBS10). VA loss in BBS1 ranged from 0 to 2.2 lines (mean 0.75) and in BBS10 from 0.3 to 1.5 lines (mean 1.0). 21 ERGs were recorded in 7 patients (BBS1) and 6 (BBS10). ERGs were non-recordable above noise at initial testing in 3/7 between 5.7 and 12 yrs (BBS1) and in 3/6 between 8.1 and 15.2 yrs of age. A rod-cone dysfunction was evident in 4/7 (BBS1) and 3/6 (BBS10). Repeated ERGs in 3/7 (BBS1) and 1/6 (BBS10) demonstrated significant disease progression. A maculopathy was observed in 6/7 (BBS1) and 3/7 (BBS10) patients. Refractive errors varied from +2.5 to -3.5 (BBS1) and +2.5 to -4.0 (BBS10).

Conclusions:: Both patient groups show a similar VA deterioration and progressive rod-done dysfunction. Macular changes seem to be more present among patients with BBS1 mutations, which might be biased by the higher age in this group. The ocular phenotype and the natural history do not differ significantly between patients with BBS1 and patients with BBS10 mutations.

Keywords: retinal degenerations: hereditary • genetics • electrophysiology: clinical 
×
×

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.

×