MedElevator
Войти в исследования American journal of ophthalmology · 2000
Keratoconus and mitral valve prolapse.
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.
Lichter H, Loya N, Sagie A, Cohen N, Muzmacher L, Yassur Y, Weinberger D
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To investigate the prevalence of keratoconus in patients with mitral valve prolapse (MVP).
METHODS: Videokeratography was performed in 36 patients (72 eyes) with an echocardiographic diagnosis of MVP, and were compared with 25 controls. All participants underwent slit-lamp examination and completed a medical questionnaire about joint hypermobility, arthralgia, asthma, and allergic reactions.
RESULTS: Keratoconus was found in eight eyes (11. 1%) (P =.056) of eight patients (22.2%) (P =.049) in the MVP group and in one eye (2%) of one patient (4%) in the control group. The keratoconus was unilateral and asymptomatic in all cases. Conjunctival papillae were statistical significant higher in the MVP group (P =.015). A statistically significant intergroup difference existed in the presence of an allergic reaction (P =.001), but not in arthralgia, hypermobility of joints, or asthma.
CONCLUSION: A borderline important association of MVP with keratoconus and with allergy exists. Patients with mitral valve prolapse complaining of poor vision should be suspected of having keratoconus.
METHODS: Videokeratography was performed in 36 patients (72 eyes) with an echocardiographic diagnosis of MVP, and were compared with 25 controls. All participants underwent slit-lamp examination and completed a medical questionnaire about joint hypermobility, arthralgia, asthma, and allergic reactions.
RESULTS: Keratoconus was found in eight eyes (11. 1%) (P =.056) of eight patients (22.2%) (P =.049) in the MVP group and in one eye (2%) of one patient (4%) in the control group. The keratoconus was unilateral and asymptomatic in all cases. Conjunctival papillae were statistical significant higher in the MVP group (P =.015). A statistically significant intergroup difference existed in the presence of an allergic reaction (P =.001), but not in arthralgia, hypermobility of joints, or asthma.
CONCLUSION: A borderline important association of MVP with keratoconus and with allergy exists. Patients with mitral valve prolapse complaining of poor vision should be suspected of having keratoconus.