Occult inflammation detected by autofluorescence May Be the cause of idiopathic choroidal neovascularization

Idiopathic multifocal choroiditis (MFC): aggressive and prolonged therapy with multiple immunosuppressive agents is needed to halt the progression of active disease. An offbeat review and a case series

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Idiopathic multifocal choroiditis (MFC) is part of the group of choriocapillaritis entities. The clinical definition of the disease has evolved with time. The aim of this article was to undertake a review on MFC, on its present-day appraisal and nomenclature and we also report a series of patients with emphasis on the clinical presentation and the importance of vigorous immunosuppressive management.

METHODS

A review of the literature and a retrospective case series study which was performed in the Centre for Ophthalmic Specialised care (COS), Lausanne, Switzerland. Patients diagnosed from 1994 to 2020 with idiopathic multifocal choroiditis (MFC) treated with multiple immunosuppressants were included. Exclusion criteria were insufficient follow up and cases not treated with vigorous immunosuppressive therapy. Imaging analysis included spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) / enhanced depth imaging OCT (EDI-OCT), OCT angiography (OCT-A). Fluorescein and Indocyanine angiography (FA, ICGA) before and after the instauration of treatment. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), routine ocular examination, laser flare photometry (LFP) were performed at presentation and follow-up. Immunosuppression comprised at minimum two among the following agents: prednisone, cyclosporine, azathioprine, mycophenolic acid or infliximab. Mean duration of therapy was calculated.

RESULTS

26 (52 eyes) of 2102 new patients (1.24%) were diagnosed with MFC. 25 (96%) patients were female and 1 (4%) was male. 43/52 (82%) eyes were myopic with a mean dioptre of - 5.87 ± 2.94, six (12%) eyes were hypermetropic with mean dioptres 2.0 ± 2.68 and three (6%) were emmetropic. 14/52 (27%) eyes had at least 1 anti-VEGF injection because of choroidal neovascularisation (CNVs), 1 eye had a phototherapy laser and 37/52 (71%) had no complication of CNVs during the follow-up. 5/26 (19%) fulfilled the inclusion criteria for our study. Mean age was 26.4 ± 9.3 years. Snellen best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at presentation was 0.955+/-0.26. Mean follow up was 84+/-55 months. LFP at presentation was 6.34 ± 2.94 ph/ms. None of four patients with prolonged treatment and prolonged follow-up showed disease activity. One patient still under therapy after 4 months' follow-up still showed an active neovascular membrane.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with multiple immunosuppressive agents was shown to stop the progression of the disease.

Spectral domain-optical coherence tomography retinal biomarkers in choroidal neovascularization of multifocal choroiditis, myopic choroidal neovascularization, and idiopathic choroidal neovascularization

OBJECTIVE

To use optical coherence tomography (OCT) to compare retinal biomarkers of choroidal neovascularization (CNV) secondary to multifocal choroiditis (MFC), myopic choroidal neovascularization (mCNV), and idiopathic choroidal neovascularization (ICNV) and to provide a basis for its clinical diagnosis and treatment.

METHODS

In this retrospective case study, patients admitted to the Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University between January 2018 and January 2021 who were initially diagnosed with CNV secondary to MFC, mCNV, and ICNV were categorized into groups, by disease, for analysis. Spectral domain-OCT (SD-OCT) was used to describe and measure the morphological characteristics of CNV lesions in each group. The retinal biomarkers of CNV in MFC, mCNV, and ICNV were compared.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients (71 eyes) were included and all eyes were diagnosed with active type 2 CNV. The MFC group had higher refraction than the ICNV group (P2 < 0.05). The choroidal thickness (CT) and CNV diameter of the MFC group were significantly greater than those of the mCNV group (P1 < 0.05). The number of eyes with sub-retinal fluids (SRF) and a "pitchfork sign" was significantly greater in the MFC group than in the mCNV group (P1 < 0.05). There was a significant difference only in CT) values between the MFC and ICNV groups (P2 < 0.001), but not in the other observation indicators (P2 > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

OCT biomarkers, such as the diameter of the CNV, SRF, the "pitchfork sign," and CT under CNV are useful in distinguishing CNV secondary to MFC from mCNV, which can allow the timely selection of treatment in some difficult cases. There were no differences between the MFC group and ICNV group except in refractive error, which indicates that some ICNV cases may be an early stage of a type of occult chorioretinitis. Long-term follow-up is needed for ICNV patients to confirm whether there is any potential inflammation.Key messagesSometimes, it is difficult to separate MFC with CNV from myopic CNV and ICNV in clinical.OCT biomarkers, such as the diameter of the CNV, SRF, the "pitchfork sign," and CT under CNV are useful in distinguishing CNV secondary to MFC from mCNV.There were no differences between the MFC group and ICNV group except in refractive error.