Acta ophthalmologica Scandinavica · 2002
Usher syndrome clinical types I and II: could ocular symptoms and signs differentiate between the two types?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
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.
Tsilou Ekaterini T, Rubin Benjamin I, Caruso Rafael C, Reed George F, Pikus Anita, Hejtmancik James F, Iwata Fumino, Redman Joy B, Kaiser-Kupfer Muriel I
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Usher syndrome types I and II are clinical syndromes with substantial genetic and clinical heterogeneity. We undertook the current study in order to identify ocular symptoms and signs that could differentiate between the two types.
METHODS: Sixty-seven patients with Usher syndrome were evaluated. Based on audiologic and vestibular findings, patients were classified as either Usher type I or II. The severity of the ocular signs and symptoms present in each type were compared.
RESULTS: Visual acuity, visual field area, electroretinographic amplitude, incidence of cataract and macular lesions were not significantly different between Usher types I and II. However, the ages when night blindness was perceived and retinitis pigmentosa was diagnosed differed significantly between the two types.
CONCLUSIONS: There seems to be some overlap between types I and II of Usher syndrome in regard to the ophthalmologic findings. However, night blindness appears earlier in Usher type I (although the difference in age of appearance appears to be less dramatic than previously assumed). Molecular elucidation of Usher syndrome may serve as a key to understanding these differences and, perhaps, provide a better tool for use in clinical diagnosis, prognosis and genetic counseling.
METHODS: Sixty-seven patients with Usher syndrome were evaluated. Based on audiologic and vestibular findings, patients were classified as either Usher type I or II. The severity of the ocular signs and symptoms present in each type were compared.
RESULTS: Visual acuity, visual field area, electroretinographic amplitude, incidence of cataract and macular lesions were not significantly different between Usher types I and II. However, the ages when night blindness was perceived and retinitis pigmentosa was diagnosed differed significantly between the two types.
CONCLUSIONS: There seems to be some overlap between types I and II of Usher syndrome in regard to the ophthalmologic findings. However, night blindness appears earlier in Usher type I (although the difference in age of appearance appears to be less dramatic than previously assumed). Molecular elucidation of Usher syndrome may serve as a key to understanding these differences and, perhaps, provide a better tool for use in clinical diagnosis, prognosis and genetic counseling.