Optical coherence tomography and angiography in multiple sclerosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND
OBJECTIVES
Anterior visual pathway involvement is common in multiple sclerosis (MS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) can be utilized to examine the integrity of the ganglion cell axons (peri-papillary retinal nerve fiber layer; pRNFL) and cell bodies (ganglion cell & inner plexiform layer; GCIPL). OCT angiography (OCTA) can be used to investigate the retinal microvasculature. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we synthesized OCT and OCTA findings in MS.
METHODS
We identified studies that performed OCT and OCTA in people with MS and included data permitting at least one of the following comparisons: 1) MS optic neuritis (MS-ON) vs healthy-control (HC) eyes; 2) MS non-ON (MS-NON) vs HC eyes; and 3) MS-ON vs MS-NON eyes.
RESULTS
The OCT meta-analysis included 170 studies and 8542 HC, 5529 MS-ON, and 14,822 MS-NON eyes. MS-ON and MS-NON eyes had lower pRNFL and GCIPL thickness compared to HC. There was no difference in inner nuclear layer (INL) thickness between HC and MS; INL was thicker in MS-ON compared to MS-NON eyes. The OCTA meta-analysis included 24 studies and 1344 HC, 505 MS-ON, and 1168 MS-NON eyes. MS-ON and MS-NON eyes had lower peripapillary vessel density and macular superficial vessel density compared to HC. We also summarized 12 studies evaluating the diagnostic yield of inter-eye differences in OCT measurements for detecting unilateral optic nerve involvement.
CONCLUSIONS
OCT allows for reliable quantification of retinal neuro-axonal damage in MS. In our review, we highlight studies demonstrating that OCT can establish robust thresholds for detecting unilateral optic nerve involvement.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.