Optic Disc Pit Maculopathy: New Perspectives on the Natural History.
Am J Ophthalmol 2019;
207:159-169. [PMID:
31095956 DOI:
10.1016/j.ajo.2019.05.010]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2019] [Revised: 05/04/2019] [Accepted: 05/06/2019] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE
To investigate the natural history of optic disc pit maculopathy and explore the associations between demographic, anatomic, and functional characteristics.
DESIGN
Retrospective, comparative case series.
METHODS
This was a single-center medical record review of previously untreated optic disc pit maculopathy. Baseline data of visual function, demographics, and pit physiognomy were collected, and further subgroup analysis was undertaken on patients with long-term follow-up, according to whether they were monitored or received surgical intervention. LogMAR visual acuity was the primary outcome measure, and anatomic characteristics were reported where available.
RESULTS
Eighty-seven patients were identified with a new presentation of optic disc pit maculopathy. No demographic or pit features were correlated with vision at baseline. In 51 patients with available optical coherence tomography data, only the presence of subretinal fluid at baseline was associated with poorer visual acuity (P < .001). Fifty-two patients who were monitored without treatment had available long-term follow-up data. The mean change in visual acuity in this group was 0.01, with 77% maintaining visual acuity ≤0.30. Twenty-seven patients underwent surgery and showed significant postoperative improvement in vision (P < .001), with 59% achieving an acuity ≤0.30. Duration of postoperative follow-up was associated with better visual acuity (P = .007).
CONCLUSION
Many patients with optic disc pit maculopathy maintain good long-term visual acuity and may demonstrate resolution of subretinal fluid in the absence of surgical intervention. There may be evidence to support delaying surgical treatment until visual deterioration is observed because of the potential stability or spontaneous improvement of the condition, the high rate of reoperation, and the long-term positive outcomes of deferred intervention.
Collapse