Long-Term Follow-Up of Dry Age-Related Macular Degeneration Patients
Rattachement africain : us, it. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Abstract Purpose: To assess the progression rate from dry age-related macular degeneration (dAMD) to advanced AMD and possible risk factors. Methods: Demographics, medical and ocular conditions, baseline eye examinations, optical coherence tomography features, and progression rates to advanced AMD were collected. Results: We included 74 eyes from 47 dAMD patients, with a mean age of 74.58 ± 8.29 years and 38.30% males. During a follow-up period of 8.9 ± 0.4 years, 40 eyes (54.05%) progressed to advanced AMD, with 25 eyes (33.78%) developing neovascular AMD (nAMD) and 22 eyes (29.72%) progressing to geographic atrophy (GA). Patients progressing to advanced AMD were older (77.8 ± 6.5 vs. 73.8 ± 9.5, P = 0.03). A higher incidence of open-angle glaucoma (OAG) was noted in progressing eyes (32.5% vs. 8.8%, P = 0.01), along with thinner baseline central macular thickness (CMT) (247.93 ± 32.55 vs. 268.67 ± 16.75, P = 0.007). Smokers with OAG had a higher tendency to develop nAMD ( P < 0.05). Females with lower best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were more likely to develop GA ( P < 0.001). Conclusions: The progression rate to advanced AMD was 54.05% over 8.9 ± 0.4 years. Advanced age, reduced baseline CMT, and lower BCVA were linked to progression. OAG and smoking were associated with higher nAMD, while females had a higher risk of GA.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Long-Term Follow-Up of Dry Age-Related Macular Degeneration Patients
- Date Crossref
- 01/01/2025
- Éditeur
- Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.