The British journal of ophthalmology · 2024
Anterior segment involvement in vitreoretinal lymphoma: clinical manifestations, molecular findings and in vivo confocal microscopy.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
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.
Marchese Alessandro, Di Biase Carlo, Cicinelli Maria Vittoria, Menean Matteo, Ferrari Giulio, Bandello Francesco, Modorati Giulio, Goldstein Debra Anne, Miserocchi Elisabetta
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Intermediate and posterior manifestations of vitreoretinal lymphoma (VRL) are well characterised. However, there is limited information on anterior segment involvement in VRL. This study aimed to describe the anterior manifestations of VRL, and their association with molecular testing.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients with biopsy-proven VRL. Study variables included anterior segment manifestations, findings from slit-lamp photos and in vivo confocal microscopy (IVCM) when available. MYD88 L265P mutation and cytology in the aqueous humour, retinal and systemic findings were also analysed.
RESULTS: The analysis included 108 eyes of 55 VRL patients. Anterior segment involvement was present in at least one visit in 55 eyes (51%) of 33 patients (60%); it included keratic precipitates (dendritiform with branching and irregular margins in 33 eyes, dust-like in 16 eyes and large granulomatous in 12 eyes), cells in the anterior chamber (51 eyes) and posterior synechiae (2 eyes). IVCM was available for 41 eyes and showed different morphologies of keratic precipitates, including floral, spikes and mulberry patterns (66%, 56% and 20%, respectively). MYD88 L265P mutation in the aqueous humour was detected in 10/21 (48%) eyes with no anterior segment involvement and 24/37 (65%) eyes with anterior segment involvement.
CONCLUSIONS: Anterior segment manifestations are often present in VRL and include dendritiform and dust-like keratic precipitates. IVCM in VRL can identify different patterns associated with keratic precipitates. MYD88 L265P mutation in the aqueous humour of VRL patients can also be found in eyes without significant anterior segment involvement.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients with biopsy-proven VRL. Study variables included anterior segment manifestations, findings from slit-lamp photos and in vivo confocal microscopy (IVCM) when available. MYD88 L265P mutation and cytology in the aqueous humour, retinal and systemic findings were also analysed.
RESULTS: The analysis included 108 eyes of 55 VRL patients. Anterior segment involvement was present in at least one visit in 55 eyes (51%) of 33 patients (60%); it included keratic precipitates (dendritiform with branching and irregular margins in 33 eyes, dust-like in 16 eyes and large granulomatous in 12 eyes), cells in the anterior chamber (51 eyes) and posterior synechiae (2 eyes). IVCM was available for 41 eyes and showed different morphologies of keratic precipitates, including floral, spikes and mulberry patterns (66%, 56% and 20%, respectively). MYD88 L265P mutation in the aqueous humour was detected in 10/21 (48%) eyes with no anterior segment involvement and 24/37 (65%) eyes with anterior segment involvement.
CONCLUSIONS: Anterior segment manifestations are often present in VRL and include dendritiform and dust-like keratic precipitates. IVCM in VRL can identify different patterns associated with keratic precipitates. MYD88 L265P mutation in the aqueous humour of VRL patients can also be found in eyes without significant anterior segment involvement.