Acta ophthalmologica · 2019
Effect of Ocriplasmin on objectively assessed retinal function after treatment of vitreomacular diseases.
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.
Schatz Andreas, Seuthe Anna-Maria, Januschowski Kai
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The scope of the study was the functional assessment of possible effects of intravitreally injected ocriplasmin using electroretinographical (ERG) examinations.
METHODS: Seven subjects suffered from pathologies within the label of ocriplasmin (Jetrea® ) were examined in the study. An extended international society for clinical electrophysiology of vision ERG protocol was used for baseline recordings (before treatment) and was repeated for comparison 3 months after treatment with intravitreally injected ocriplasmin. All subjects were examined using 6 steps and a 9 Hz flicker protocol as scotopic flicker response under dark-adapted conditions. Under light-adapted conditions, two single-flash responses (standard flash and On/Off protocol) and a 31 Hz flicker response was used for functional assessment.
RESULTS: A significant reduction of amplitudes was found for the lowest stimulation intensity (0.0001 cd.s/m²) under dark-adapted conditions after treatment (p = 0.027). All other parameters were not significantly different after treatment including the scotopic flicker response. Under light-adapted state, the a- and b-wave amplitudes were not significantly altered after treatment for single-flash and flicker responses. The On- and Off-responses were not significantly different between baseline and after the treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: One single significant difference of all examined parameters mirrors a difference due to chance, even if a negative effect of proteolytic enzymes on laminin and fibronectin of retinal cells cannot be entirely excluded. Nevertheless, this result should be respected in order to ensure a safe use of ocriplasmin for patients with vitreoretinal disorders.
METHODS: Seven subjects suffered from pathologies within the label of ocriplasmin (Jetrea® ) were examined in the study. An extended international society for clinical electrophysiology of vision ERG protocol was used for baseline recordings (before treatment) and was repeated for comparison 3 months after treatment with intravitreally injected ocriplasmin. All subjects were examined using 6 steps and a 9 Hz flicker protocol as scotopic flicker response under dark-adapted conditions. Under light-adapted conditions, two single-flash responses (standard flash and On/Off protocol) and a 31 Hz flicker response was used for functional assessment.
RESULTS: A significant reduction of amplitudes was found for the lowest stimulation intensity (0.0001 cd.s/m²) under dark-adapted conditions after treatment (p = 0.027). All other parameters were not significantly different after treatment including the scotopic flicker response. Under light-adapted state, the a- and b-wave amplitudes were not significantly altered after treatment for single-flash and flicker responses. The On- and Off-responses were not significantly different between baseline and after the treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: One single significant difference of all examined parameters mirrors a difference due to chance, even if a negative effect of proteolytic enzymes on laminin and fibronectin of retinal cells cannot be entirely excluded. Nevertheless, this result should be respected in order to ensure a safe use of ocriplasmin for patients with vitreoretinal disorders.