Insights into the Underlying Choroid in Different Stages of Idiopathic Epiretinal Membranes after Viteromacular Surgery.

Xinglin Wang,Jiarui Yang,Zihan Li,Qingyi Hou,Changguan Wang,Xuemin Li
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.15295
2022-01-01
Acta Ophthalmologica
Abstract:PurposeThe purpose of the study was to longitudinally investigate the correlation between choroidal morphologic and vascular parameters and postoperative visual outcome in different stages of idiopathic epiretinal membranes (iERMs). MethodsA prospective, observational, institutional case series of 102 consecutive patients diagnosed with unilateral iERMs were recruited at Peking University Third Hospital and were followed up for 12 months after surgical treatment with vitrectomy. Participants were classified into four stages according to current staging scheme. All eligible subjects underwent standardized imaging evaluation of choroidal parameters including subfoveal choroidal thickness (SFCT), choroidal vascularity index (CVI), and choroidal capillary perfusion (CCP) at baseline and each follow-up by enhanced depth optical coherence tomography (EDI-OCT) and OCT angiography (OCTA). Longitudinal follow-up of choroidal parameters over 12 months was analysed, and their correlations with best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were also assessed for predictive prognostic value. ResultsCVI and CCP were significantly correlated with BCVA at each follow-up examination (all p < 0.05). However, SFCT exhibited no variation among different stages of iERMs at baseline (p = 0.981) or during follow-up (p = 0.520). The preoperative CVI correlated with 12-month postoperative BCVA (p < 0.001) and its predictive prognostic effect on BCVA was validated in multiple regression analysis (p = 0.006). ConclusionCVI varied among different stages of iERM and was significantly correlated with visual outcomes after the surgery. CVI could serve as a predictive prognostic marker in iERMs, which further indicates the underlying choroid should be taken into consideration in clinical evaluation of iERMs.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?