Multiple Sclerosis: What Methods are Available for the Assessment of Subclinical Visual System Damage?

YABANOĞLU D., TOPCU YILMAZ P., Irkec M., Kocer B., Arli B., İRKEÇ C., ...Daha Fazla

NEURO-OPHTHALMOLOGY, cilt.46, sa.6, ss.359-366, 2022 (ESCI) identifier identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 46 Sayı: 6
  • Basım Tarihi: 2022
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1080/01658107.2022.2066699
  • Dergi Adı: NEURO-OPHTHALMOLOGY
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, EMBASE
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.359-366
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Subclinical multiple sclerosis, optical coherence tomography, optic neuritis, standard automated perimetry, frequency-doubling perimetry, axonal degeneration, NERVE-FIBER LAYER, OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY, FREQUENCY-DOUBLING TECHNOLOGY, SPECTRAL-DOMAIN, AXONAL LOSS, TIME-DOMAIN, FIELD, PERIMETRY, NEURITIS, IMPAIRMENT
  • Hacettepe Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

We aimed to assess the visual fields and optical coherence tomography (OCT) measurements in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) to detect subclinical visual system disease. The study included 15 MS patients with previous optic neuritis (Group I), 17 MS patients without previous optic neuritis (Group II), and 14 healthy controls (Group III). Each subject underwent standard automated perimetry (SAP), frequency doubling technology perimetry (FDTP), and OCT. The mean deviation of SAP in Group I was lower than those in Groups II (p = .018) and III (p = .001). The pattern standard deviation of SAP in Group I was higher than those in Group III (p < .0001). The mean deviation of FDTP in Groups I and II was lower than those in Group III (p = .0001 and p = .016, respectively). The temporal quadrant of the retinal nerve fibre layer in Group I was thinner than those in Groups II and III (p = .005 and p = .003, respectively). The mean macular volume in Group I was thinner than those in Groups II and III (p = .004 and p = .002, respectively). A single method is inadequate for establishing early and/or mild visual impairment in MS. All conventional and non-conventional techniques are complementary in demonstrating subclinical visual damage in MS.