The Pathophysiology of Subretinal Hemorrhage

Author(s):  
Salvatore Grisanti ◽  
Swaantje Grisanti
PLoS ONE ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. e53338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shoji Notomi ◽  
Toshio Hisatomi ◽  
Yusuke Murakami ◽  
Hiroto Terasaki ◽  
Shozo Sonoda ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jae Hui Kim ◽  
Young Suk Chang ◽  
Jong Woo Kim ◽  
Chul Gu Kim ◽  
Dong Won Lee

Purpose. To investigate the incidence and timing of prechoroidal cleft development and its association with visual prognosis in type 3 neovascularization. Methods. This retrospective study included 166 eyes that were diagnosed with type 3 neovascularization. All eyes were treated with antivascular endothelial growth factor therapy. The incidence and timing of prechoroidal cleft development were evaluated. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at diagnosis and at final follow-up was compared between eyes with (cleft group) and without (no-cleft group) prechoroidal cleft. The incidence of retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) tear and subretinal hemorrhage was also compared between the two groups. Results. During the mean 39.7 ± 18.5 months of follow-up, prechoroidal cleft developed in 37 eyes (22.3%) at an average of 14.6 ± 10.4 months. The BCVA at final follow-up was significantly worse in the cleft group than in the no-cleft group (P=0.024), whereas the difference was not significant at diagnosis (P=0.969). The incidence of RPE tear (P=0.002) and subretinal hemorrhage (P<0.001) was significantly higher in the cleft group. Conclusions. Prechoroidal cleft is a frequently observed finding during the treatment course of type 3 neovascularization. Eyes with prechoroidal cleft are at high risk of RPE tear or subretinal hemorrhage and subsequently associated with poor prognosis.


2013 ◽  
pp. 351-352
Author(s):  
Roger P. Harrie ◽  
Cynthia J. Kendall

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-10
Author(s):  
Caryssa L. Yan ◽  
Marten E. Brelen ◽  
Haoyu Chen ◽  
Weiqi Chen

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Jae Hui Kim ◽  
Jong Woo Kim ◽  
Chul Gu Kim

Background. To evaluate the proportion of eyes that do not meet the eligibility criteria of clinical trials on neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and the reasons for exclusion. Methods. This retrospective, observational study included 512 eyes of 463 patients diagnosed with treatment-naïve neovascular AMD. The proportion of eyes that did not meet the eligibility criteria of the Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Trap-Eye: Investigation of Efficacy and Safety in Wet AMD (VIEW) studies were evaluated. The two most common reasons for exclusion were also evaluated in each subtype of neovascular AMD (typical neovascular AMD, polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV), and type 3 neovascularization). Results. Among the 512 eyes, 229 (44.7%) did not meet the eligibility criteria. In all the included eyes, the most common reasons for exclusion were good or poor visual acuity (169 eyes, 33.0%), followed by the presence of subretinal hemorrhage (47 eyes, 9.5%). Moreover, good or poor visual acuity was the most common reason for exclusion in all three subtypes of neovascular AMD. The second most common reason was a fovea-involving scar or fibrosis in typical neovascular AMD, subretinal hemorrhage in PCV, and other vascular diseases affecting the retina in type 3 neovascularization. Conclusions. Among the included cases, 44.7% did not meet the eligibility criteria for VIEW study, suggesting that the conclusion derived from clinical trials may not directly reflect the real-world outcomes. Additionally, the reasons for ineligibility differed among the different subtypes of neovascular AMD.


Ophthalmology ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 111 (5) ◽  
pp. 926-930 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregg T Kokame ◽  
Izumi Yamamoto ◽  
Shoji Kishi ◽  
Akihiko Tamura ◽  
John H Drouilhet

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document