Treatable blindness in temporal arteritis

No Light Perception Vision in Neuro-Ophthalmology Practice

BACKGROUND

To determine differential diagnosis and visual outcomes of patients with no light perception (NLP) vision related to neuro-ophthalmic conditions.

METHODS

Retrospective case series of patients seen at tertiary neuro-ophthalmology practices. Patients were included if they had NLP vision any time during their clinical course. Outcome measures were final diagnosis, treatment, and visual outcome.

RESULTS

Seventy-two eyes of 65 patients were included. The average age was 57.6 (range 18-93) years, and 58% were women. The Most common diagnosis (21 patients) was compressive optic neuropathy (CON) with meningioma being the most common culprit (12). Other diagnoses included optic neuritis (ON) (11 patients), infiltrative optic neuropathies (8), posterior ischemic optic neuropathy (7), nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (4), arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (3), ophthalmic artery occlusion (3), nonorganic vision loss (3), radiation-induced optic neuropathy (2), cortical vision loss (1), retinitis pigmentosa with optic disc drusen (1), and infectious optic neuropathy (1). Ten patients recovered vision: 7 ON, 2 infiltrative optic neuropathy, and 1 CON. Corticosteroids accelerated vision recovery in 7 of the 11 patients with ON to mean 20/60 (0.48 logMAR) over 9.0 ± 8.6 follow-up months. Eleven patients deteriorated to NLP after presenting with at least LP; their diagnoses included CON (3), ophthalmic artery occlusion (2), infiltration (2), ON (1), posterior ischemic optic neuropathy (1), arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (1), and radiation-induced optic neuropathy (1).

CONCLUSIONS

NLP vision may occur because of various diagnoses. Vision recovery was mainly seen in patients with ON. Serious systemic conditions may present or relapse with NLP vision, which clinicians should consider as an alarming sign in patients with known malignancies.

Giant cell arteritis: an updated review

Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is the most common primary vasculitis of adults. The incidence of this disease is practically nil in the population under the age of 50 years, then rises dramatically with each passing decade. The median age of onset of the disease is about 75 years. As the ageing population expands, it is increasingly important for ophthalmologists to be familiar with GCA and its various manifestations, ophthalmic and non-ophthalmic. A heightened awareness of this condition can avoid delays in diagnosis and treatment. It is well known that prompt initiation of steroids remains the most effective means for preventing potentially devastating ischaemic complications. This review summarizes the current concepts regarding the immunopathogenetic pathways that lead to arteritis and the major phenotypic subtypes of GCA with emphasis on large vessel vasculitis, novel modalities for disease detection and investigative trials using alternative, non-steroid therapies.

Oral and intravenous steroids in giant cell arteritis

Giant cell arteritis can result in devastating visual loss. Treatment with steroids does result in visual recovery in some patients but the exact percentage is unknown. Intravenous megadose steroids appear to offer some advantage over oral steroids presumably through non-genomic effects, which manifest at doses of 500 mg or more. Side-effects are more likely in the elderly especially those with renal and cardiac co-morbidities. The authors' current recommendation is that intravenous steroids should be given to patients with established visual loss or amaurosis fugax.

Visual improvement with corticosteroid therapy in giant cell arteritis. Report of a large study and review of literature

OBJECTIVES

(1) To report the incidence and extent of visual improvement achieved by high-dose systemic corticosteroid treatment in eyes with visual loss due to giant-cell arteritis (GCA). (2) To understand the cause of the discrepancies between visual improvement revealed by routine visual acuity (VA) and by the central visual field in kinetic perimetry. (3) To review critically the contradictory literature on the effectiveness of corticosteroid therapy on visual recovery in GCA and to attempt to reconcile differences in the reported results.

METHODS

Clinical data were collected systematically on 84 consecutive patients (114 eyes) with visual loss, all of whom had GCA confirmed by temporal artery biopsy and treated by us with high-dose systemic corticosteroid therapy. The patients were treated between 1974 and 1999 and data were compiled retrospectively. All patients underwent a detailed visual and ophthalmic evaluation at the initial visit and at every follow-up. This included visual field testing (with a Goldmann perimeter). All were treated with systemic corticosteroid therapy (intravenous followed by oral in 41 patients and oral only in 43 patients).

RESULTS

Visual loss was due to anterior ischaemic optic neuropathy (91%), central retinal artery occlusion (10.5%), cilioretinal artery occlusion (10%), and/or posterior ischaemic optic neuropathy (4%), either alone or in different combinations. Improvement in both VA (>or= 2 lines) and central visual field was found in only five (4%) eyes of five patients (three treated with intravenous and two with oral steroid therapy). Improvement in VA >or= 2 lines but not in the central visual field was found in seven eyes (in six patients). Visual improvement was seen in 7% of 41 patients treated initially with intravenous steroids versus 5% (p = 0.672) of 43 patients treated with oral steroids only. Comparison of patients with visual improvement in both VA and fields versus those with no improvement suggested a shorter interval (p = 0.065) between onset of visual loss and start of therapy in the improved patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, only 4% of eyes with visual loss due to GCA improved, as judged by improvement in both VA and central visual field (by kinetic perimetry and Amsler grid). The data also suggest that there is a better (p = 0.065) chance of visual improvement with early diagnosis and immediate start of steroid therapy. Improvement in VA without associated improvement in the central visual field or Amsler grid may simply represent a learned ability to fixate eccentrically with more effective use of remaining vision: this factor could help explain a number of reported cases in the literature of improved VA after steroid treatment for GCA. To prevent further visual loss in either eye and for management of systemic manifestations of GCA, all patients must be treated on a long-term basis with adequate amounts of systemic corticosteroids.

Current concepts in giant cell (temporal) arteritis

Giant cell (temporal) arteritis continues to be a sight-threatening, systemic vasculitis with a poorly understood pathogenesis. The characteristic granulomatous inflammation of the vessel wall commonly leads to local ischemia. Recent advances in immunological investigations have characterized the cellular components of the disease process, but the etiology has so far remained unresolved. A reappraisal of the clinical features of giant cell (temporal) arteritis demonstrates the heterogeneity of the manifestations of the disease, including ischemic optic neuropathy. A range of new laboratory investigations and blood flow studies with color Doppler imaging have demonstrated promising roles, with respect to diagnosis and long-term follow-up. Prompt diagnosis and expeditious treatment require a high index of clinical suspicion, particularly for atypical cases. Corticosteroids remain the treatment of choice, other immuno-suppressive agents being used as second line steroid-sparing agents. Giant cell (temporal) arteritis leads to increased vascular and visual morbidity and, if untreated, may prove fatal. To maintain high standards of management of this enigmatic disorder, ophthalmologists need to be aware of the clinical spectrum of giant cell (temporal) arteritis and currently available diagnostic tests and treatment strategies.

Progressive visual loss from giant cell arteritis despite high-dose intravenous methylprednisolone

BACKGROUND

Giant cell arteritis (GCA) often presents with devastating visual loss in the elderly, yet the ideal treatment is unknown. The disease most often has been treated with oral prednisone, although recently the use of the high-dose intravenous methylprednisolone (IVMP) has been reported to enhance visual recovery.

METHODS

The authors reviewed patient charts from two university-based neuroophthalmology services and reviewed all previously reported cases of GCA treated with IVMP.

RESULTS

Four patients with GCA exhibited severe, progressive visual loss after at least 48 hours of high-dose IVMP. A fifth patient had further visual loss in one eye and improvement in the other eye after 24 hours of IVMP. In previous reports of IVMP treatment in GCA, four patients lost vision and 14 patients recovered vision. The authors review the details of these reports.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of IVMP treatment of patients with visual loss from GCA are similar to the results of treatment with oral corticosteroids, with IVMP treatment being more costly and having a small risk of sudden death. The optimal dosage and route of corticosteroid treatment for GCA with visual loss remain elusive and warrant a treatment trial.

Facial swelling in giant cell (temporal) arteritis

Giant cell (temporal) arteritis is a systemic vasculitis of the elderly. Facial swelling is a rare manifestation of the arteritic process. Delay in recognition of the condition can result in profound loss of vision. This report describes a biopsy-proven arteritic patient who developed anterior ischaemic optic neuropathy (AION) following facial swelling. Both arteritic AION and facial swelling responded to high-dose steroid treatment. Facial swelling in giant cell (temporal) arteritis could be an indicator of risk of AION. Intravenous steroid treatment can lead to salvation of useful vision.

Reversible loss of light perception after vitreoretinal surgery

PURPOSE

We studied reversible loss of light perception after vitreoretinal surgery to show that functional vision can return in some patients.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of seven patients who had postoperative reversible loss of light perception in the eye that underwent vitreoretinal surgery. Differences in the postoperative courses and interventions were studied.

RESULTS

Five of the seven patients had diabetes mellitus but none had hypertension. The indications for vitreoretinal surgery were severe proliferative diabetic retinopathy in five patients and retinal detachment with advanced proliferative vitreoretinopathy in two patients. Seven patients had reversible loss of light perception within the first three postoperative days. Six of the seven patients had an intraocular pressure greater than 26 mm Hg at the time the eye had no light perception. Decreasing the intraocular pressure was associated with return of light perception in five of seven patients. Return of useful vision was gradual. Four of seven patients had a visual acuity of 20/400 or better one month after surgery, and all seven had a visual acuity of 20/400 or better three months after surgery. Visual acuity in four eyes improved further to 20/70 or better at six months or more after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Reversible loss of light perception after vitreoretinal surgery does occur in some patients. Monitoring vision and intraocular pressure is important because prompt treatment may assist in the recovery of functional vision.

Cotton-wool spots and the early diagnosis of giant cell arteritis

BACKGROUND

Giant cell arteritis is a common cause of severe visual loss in older individuals. Patients often present to the ophthalmologist having already lost vision in one eye. Detection of early ophthalmoscopic signs that precede irreversible visual loss in giant cell arteritis would allow preventative treatment in an otherwise frequently blinding disease.

METHODS

Case presentations.

RESULTS

Seven patients with mild visual symptoms and results of an ophthalmologic examination significant for cotton-wool spots were found to have giant cell arteritis. On specific questioning, six of seven patients described constitutional symptoms consistent with giant cell arteritis. Six patients had an abnormally elevated Westergren erythrocyte sedimentation rate. Temporal artery biopsy confirmed giant cell arteritis in six patients. The seventh patient received a diagnosis of polymyalgia rheumatica. Prompt treatment with corticosteroids led to preservation of vision and uneventful resolution of the cotton-wool spots in all seven patients.

CONCLUSION

Cotton-wool spots are an early ophthalmoscopic finding in giant cell arteritis and can precede severe visual loss. Recognition of the significance of cotton-wool spots, use of laboratory studies, and prompt treatment may preserve vision in an otherwise frequently blinding disease.

Visual morbidity in giant cell arteritis. Clinical characteristics and prognosis for vision

PURPOSE

To characterize visual morbidity in giant cell arteritis and to assess prognosis with respect to treatment.

METHODS

Record review of 185 patients with coded diagnosis of giant cell (cranial) arteritis examined at the Bascom Palmer Eye Institute from January 1, 1980, to January 31, 1993.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients with biopsy-proven giant cell arteritis had visual symptoms, and 41 individuals (63 eyes) lost vision. The visual loss was unilateral in 19 patients (46%), sequential in 15 (37%), and simultaneous in 7 (17%). Anterior ischemic optic neuropathy developed in 88% of eyes, visual acuity was 20/200 or worse in 70%, 21% had no light perception, and the majority of field defects in testable eyes, aside from central scotomas associated with loss, showed altitudinal or arcuate patterns. Six patients lost vision during corticosteroid therapy for systemic symptoms of giant cell arteritis, whereas in 39 patients visual symptoms prompted steroid treatment. For visual symptoms, 25 patients received intravenous methylprednisolone, whereas 20 received oral prednisone alone. In the 41 patients with visual loss, vision was unchanged in 20 (49%), it worsened in 7 (17%), and it improved in 14 (34%). Subsequent fellow eye involvement was observed only with oral therapy, and a greater percentage of patients (9/23 [39%] versus 5/18 [28%]) improved after intravenous treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

In the authors' series, patients with visual loss due to giant cell arteritis had a 34% chance for some improvement in visual function after corticosteroid treatment. Intravenous therapy may diminish the likelihood of fellow eye involvement and was associated with a slightly better prognosis for visual improvement.

Visual prognosis in giant cell arteritis

PURPOSE

The visual prognosis in giant cell arteritis (GCA) was evaluated over a 5-year period.

METHODS

The authors reviewed the records of all patients with a diagnosis of GCA established at the Mayo Clinic over a 5-year period regarding visual status. Follow-up data for these patients were obtained 5 years later.

RESULTS

Of the 245 patients studied, 34 (14%) permanently lost vision because of GCA. In 32 of these patients, the visual deficit developed before glucocorticoid therapy for GCA was begun; in the 2 other patients, the visual loss occurred after the diagnosis was made and therapy was started. Visual loss progressed in three patients after initiation of oral glucocorticoids, and in five other patients vision improved. After 5 years, the probability of loss of vision developing after initiating oral glucocorticoid treatment was determined to be 1% (Kaplan-Meier technique), and the probability of additional loss was 13% in patients with GCA who had a visual deficit at the time therapy was begun.

CONCLUSION

The development or progression of visual loss was rare after the initiation of glucocorticoid therapy.

Visual recovery in two patients after intravenous methylprednisolone treatment of central retinal artery occlusion secondary to giant-cell arteritis

Two patients with central retinal artery occlusions secondary to biopsy-proven giant-cell arteritis lost visual acuity to no light perception but recovered to baseline acuity after treatment with intravenous methylprednisolone at a dose of 15 to 30 mg/kg/day. The potential advantages and theoretical basis of early and aggressive treatment with large-dose intravenous corticosteroids in arteritic central retinal artery occlusion are discussed.