Macular Dystrophies

Modern diagnostic and therapeutic approaches in familial maculopathy with reference to North Carolina macular dystrophy

AIMS

We present a familial hereditary macular dystrophy, resembling North Carolina Macular Dystrophy. In members of a family, we describe the development of diagnostic-therapeutic approaches and their impact on the prognosis of those whose vision was affected.

METHODS

The macular dystrophy of varying degrees of severity was diagnosed in 3 consecutive generations in different family members, both men and women. Modern therapeutic tools were used for the diagnostics. In one patient of the youngest generation, the development of secondary choroidal neovascularization (CNV) was identified and treated with an anti-VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor) agent. DNA was isolated from venous blood and genome sequencing was performed in a proband.

RESULTS

We analysed the data of 13 members of one family of three consecutive generations. Six of them had macular dystrophy. The first were two of three siblings, a woman (73 years old) and a man (67). The offspring of the afflicted man, a female (36) and a male (80), had maculopathy. The first daughter of the woman (12) revealed findings of maculopathy but with normal electrical activity of the retina. The second girl (18), developed secondary CNV which responded well to intravitreal anti-VEGF treatment. Genetic analysis excluded mutations previously reported to be pathogenic for NCMD.

CONCLUSION

If there is a maculopathy of unclear etiology in younger patients or in patients with unclear development or appearance, it is advisable to focus carefully on the family history and trace the occurrence of impaired vision in other family members.

Predominance of hyperopia in autosomal dominant Best vitelliform macular dystrophy

Background/Aims

Patients with BEST1-associated autosomal dominant Best vitelliform macular dystrophy (AD-BVMD) have been reported to be hyperopic, but the prevalence of refractive error has not been described. This study aimed to characterise the type and degree of refractive error in a large cohort of patients with AD-BVMD compared with an age-similar group with ABCA4-associated Stargardt disease.

Methods

This was a retrospective chart review of consecutive patients with molecularly confirmed AD-BVMD and Stargardt macular dystrophy seen at a single academic centre. Demographic information, including age, gender and genotype were extracted from the chart. The best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), as well as type and degree of refractive error on manifest refraction for each eye on each visit, were recorded and compared.

Results

A total of 178 eyes from 89 patients with AD-BVMD (35 women, 54 men; mean age 36.6 years) and 306 eyes from 153 patients (94 women, 59 men, mean age 30.2 years) with Stargardt disease were included in the study. Mean BCVA was excellent for both AD-BVMD and Stargardt eyes (logMAR 0.23 vs logMAR 0.31, respectively; p=0.55). At initial refraction, 73.0% of AD-BVMD eyes (130/178) were hyperopic, with mean spherical equivalent (SE) +1.38 dioptres (median +0.88) whereas 80.7% of Stargardt eyes (247/306) were myopic, with mean SE of −1.76 dioptres (median −1.19) (p<0.001).

Conclusion

Patients with AD-BVMD are predominantly hyperopic, whereas those with Stargardt disease are predominantly myopic. The findings provide further evidence of a role for BEST1 in ocular growth and development.

Vitelliform dystrophies: Prevalence in Olmsted County, Minnesota, United States

BACKGROUND

Vitelliform dystrophies are a group of macular degenerative diseases characterized by round yellow lesions in the macula. While often idiopathic, vitelliform dystrophies include inherited maculopathies such as Best disease and some cases of pattern dystrophy. The prevalence of vitelliform dystrophies in the United States has not been reported. This study examined the prevalence of vitelliform dystrophies in Olmsted County, Minnesota.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Rochester Epidemiology Project database was used to identify all cases of vitelliform or pattern dystrophy in Olmsted County from 1 January 2000-31 December 2014.

RESULTS

Overall, 27 patients had true vitelliform lesions, indicating a prevalence of 1 in 5500. Of these, two had genetically confirmed Best disease, and an additional five to seven carried a diagnosis of Best disease, which chart reviews confirmed as probable cases; 18-20 patients had adult-onset vitelliform macular dystrophy. The prevalence of Best disease was 1 in 16,500 to 1 in 21,000. Adult-onset vitelliform macular dystrophy was found in 1 in 7400 to 1 in 8200.

CONCLUSIONS

Vitelliform dystrophies affect 1 in 5500 individuals in Olmsted County. While the values in this study provide good estimates for the prevalence of Best disease versus adult-onset vitelliform macular dystrophy, the results are limited by dependence on diagnoses made by other ophthalmologists and underutilization of genetic testing. Thus, these diseases should be thought of as at least as prevalent as reported here. As therapies for Best disease and other macular degenerative diseases are quickly becoming a reality, genetic testing should be employed as the gold standard for diagnosis of these diseases.

Stargardt-Fundus flavimaculatus: recent advancements and treatment

Stargardt disease is the most common form of autosomal recessive macular dystrophy. Mutation in the ABCA4 gene (ABCR protein) is responsible for disease manifestation in more than 95% of Stargardt patients. ABCA4 codes for a member of the ATP binding cassette transmembrane protein involved in the transport of all-trans retinal. Dysfunction in this protein causes accumulation of lipofuscin, which is toxic to the RPE and photoreceptors. Presenting symptoms, fundus appearance, and progression of the disease are widely variable in this disease. Different imaging modalities have been utilized to study the presentation and evolution of fundus changes. Although there is ongoing research to better understand the disease process and ways to alternate its path, currently there is no treatment for Startgardt patients.