DOI 10.1007/s00417-022-05575-z
Recharacterization of superior limbic keratoconjunctivitis via a subdividing grading method in 236 Chinese patients.
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Superior limbic keratoconjunctivitis (SLK) is an uncommon and often overlooked chronic ocular surface disease. This retrospective consecutive case series study on Chinese patients aimed to characterize the features of this disease, including those undescribed in previous literature.
METHODS
Two hundred thirty-six patients diagnosed with SLK were enrolled into this consecutive case study from 2016 to 2019. The demographics, symptoms, Ocular Surface Disease Index, and ocular signs were collected and analyzed. A scoring system (SLK scale index, SSI) that integrated five major sign scores was applied to evaluate SLK severity.
RESULTS
Of the 236 SLK patients, dryness was the most common complaint (59.3%). Of 459 SLK eyes, superior limbus/conjunctival staining (SCS) was present in 98% eyes, followed by the superior tarsal conjunctival alterations (85.2%) and superior bulbar conjunctiva hyperemia (80.8%). Approximately 63% of eyes were accompanied by corneal staining. Superior bulbar conjunctivochalasis was a relatively rare sign (41.6%). Among the five major signs, only the prevalence of SCS gradually increased with its severity. In addition, fluorescein staining at the inferior limbus and adjacent conjunctiva (ICS) was found positive in 163 eyes of 84 patients (36%) who had significantly higher SSI than those without ICS (p = 0.013).
CONCLUSIONS
We found that SCS is the most common out of the 5 typical signs of SLK. ICS, a new sign, occurred in one-third of patients. SCS, a simple marker of SLK, as well as SSI, an integrated evaluation system, had the advantage of evaluating the severity and objectively characterizing SLK in clinical practice.
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.