首页> 外文期刊>Investigative ophthalmology & visual science >Vision function in individuals with diabetes and moderate to severe diabetic retinopathy with and without diabetic macular edema
【24h】

Vision function in individuals with diabetes and moderate to severe diabetic retinopathy with and without diabetic macular edema

机译:糖尿病和中,重度糖尿病视网膜病变伴或不伴糖尿病黄斑水肿患者的视力功能

获取原文
           

摘要

Purpose : To determine which psychophysical measures of foveal function can distinguish among three groups of eyes with moderate-severe diabetic retinopathy: eyes with No Edema, eyes with clinically significant macular edema (CSME), and eyes with diabetic macular edema elsewhere in the macula (DME-E). Methods : Eyes were classified into 1 of the 3 groups according to the grading of dilated color fundus photographs by a retinal specialist. Fifty-five eyes (34 No Edema; 5 DME-E; 16 CSME) are included in the analyses. Foveal function was assessed using several simple, rapid, clinically practicable tests: standard (high contrast) visual acuity (VA); low contrast VA (LCVA); low contrast acuity at reduced luminance measured using the dark chart of the SKILL card (SKD); contrast sensitivity (CS; Pelli-Robson chart); and color vision (color confusion score [CCS] of the Adams desaturated D-15). Testing was monocular. A non-parametric test (Kruskal-Wallis) was used to evaluate potential differences among groups. For significant differences, post-hoc pairwise comparisons were carried out using the Mann-Whitney U test. Results : Neither VA nor LCVA differs among the 3 groups (p0.05). CS and SKD show marginally significant differences among the groups (p= 0.04 and 0.02, respectively). However, given the multiple comparisons, only the D15 CCS differs significantly among groups (p0.002). The median CCS of the CSME group is highest (76.00) and is significantly different (P=0.004) from the No Edema group (CCS= 17.18) , but neither of these groups differ significantly from the DME-E group, which has a median CCS between the other 2 groups (CCS=42.81). A CCS of a?¥ 30 was considered to be abnormal. Using this criterion, the frequency of abnormalities for the CSME group and the DME-E group are very similar (62.5% vs 60% respectively) and 3 times the rate of abnormalities seen in the No Edema group (20.6%). Among those that fail, approximately 60% of each group show a blue-yellow defect pattern in each group. These findings suggest that edema outside the fovea may also affect color vision. Conclusions : Color vision, assessed with the Adams desaturated D-15 test is sensitive to the presence of CSME, and is also affected by more peripheral edema (DME-E). This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2016 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Seattle, Wash., May 1-5, 2016.
机译:目的:确定哪种中央凹功能的心理生理措施可区分三组中度至重度糖尿病性视网膜病变:无水肿眼,具有临床显着性黄斑水肿(CSME)的眼和黄斑其他部位有糖尿病黄斑水肿的眼( DME-E)。方法:根据视网膜专家对彩色眼底照片的分级,将眼睛分为三组之一。分析中包括五十五只眼(34只水肿; 5只DME-E; 16只CSME)。使用几种简单,快速,临床上可行的测试评估小凹功能:标准(高对比度)视力(VA);低对比度VA(LCVA);使用SKILL卡(SKD)的暗表测得的亮度降低时对比度较低。对比灵敏度(CS; Pelli-Robson图);和色觉(亚当斯去饱和D-15的颜色混淆分数[CCS])。测试是单眼的。使用非参数检验(Kruskal-Wallis)评估组之间的潜在差异。对于显着差异,使用Mann-Whitney U检验进行事后成对比较。结果:3组中VA和LCVA均无差异(p> 0.05)。 CS和SKD在各组之间显示出显着的显着差异(分别为p = 0.04和0.02)。但是,经过多次比较,只有D15 CCS在各组之间存在显着差异(p <0.002)。 CSME组的中位CCS最高(76.00),与无水肿组(CCS = 17.18)显着不同(P = 0.004),但这些组与DME-E组均无显着差异其他2组之间的CCS(CCS = 42.81)。 30的CCS被认为是异常的。使用此标准,CSME组和DME-E组的异常发生频率非常相似(分别为62.5%和60%),是无水肿组中异常发生率的3倍(20.6%)。在失败的组件中,每组大约60%的组件在每组中显示出蓝黄色的缺陷图案。这些发现表明,中央凹外侧的水肿也可能影响色觉。结论:用Adams脱饱和D-15试验评估的色觉对CSME的存在敏感,并且还受到更多外周水肿(DME-E)的影响。这是提交给2016年5月1-5日在华盛顿州西雅图市举行的2016 ARVO年会的摘要。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号