An international collaborative evaluation of central serous chorioretinopathy: different therapeutic approaches and review of literature. The European Vitreoretinal Society central serous chorioretinopathy study.


Acar Gocgıl N.

Acta Ophthalmologica, cilt.1, no.1, ss.1-12, 2019 (SCI İndekslerine Giren Dergi)

  • Cilt numarası: 1 Konu: 1
  • Basım Tarihi: 2019
  • Dergi Adı: Acta Ophthalmologica
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.1-12

Özet

Abstract

PURPOSE:

To study and compare the efficacy of different therapeutic options for the treatment of central serous chorioretinopathy (CSCR).

METHODS:

This is a nonrandomized, international multicentre study on 1719 patients (1861 eyes) diagnosed with CSCR, from 63 centres (24 countries). Reported data included different methods of treatment and both results of diagnostic examinations [fluorescein angiography and/or optical coherent tomography (OCT)] and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) before and after therapy. The duration of observation had a mean of 11 months but was extended in a minority of cases up to 7 years. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of the different therapeutic options of CSCR in terms of both visual (BCVA) and anatomic (OCT) improvement.

RESULTS:

One thousand seven hundred nineteen patients (1861 eyes) diagnosed with CSCR were included. Treatments performed were nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory eye drops, laser photocoagulation, micropulse diode laser photocoagulation, photodynamic therapy (PDT; Standard PDT, Reduced-dose PDT, Reduced-fluence PDT), intravitreal (IVT) antivascular endothelial growth factor injection (VEGF), observation and other treatments. The list of the OTHERS included both combinations of the main proposed treatments or a variety of other treatments such as eplerenone, spironolactone, acetazolamide, beta-blockers, anti-anxiety drugs, aspirin, folic acid, methotrexate, statins, vitis vinifera extract medication and pars plana vitrectomy. The majority of the patients were men with a prevalence of 77%. The odds ratio (OR) showed a partial or complete resolution of fluid on OCT with any treatment as compared with observation. In univariate analysis, the anatomical result (improvement in subretinal fluid using OCT at 1 month) was favoured by age <60 years (p < 0.005), no previous observation (p < 0.0002), duration less than 3 months (p < 0.0001), absence of CSCR in the fellow eye (p = 0.04), leakage outside of the arcade (p = 0.05) and fluid height >500 μm (p = 0.03). The OR for obtaining partial or complete resolution showed that anti-VEGF and eyedrops were not statistically significant; whereas PDT (8.5), thermal laser (11.3) and micropulse laser (8.9) lead to better anatomical results with less variability. In univariate analysis, the functional result at 1 month was favoured by first episode (p = 0.04), height of subretinal fluid >500 μm (p < 0.0001) and short duration of observation (p = 0.02). Finally, there was no statistically significant difference among the treatments at 12 months.

CONCLUSION:

Spontaneous resolution has been described in a high percentage of patients. Laser (micropulse and thermal) and PDT seem to lead to significant early anatomical improvement; however, there is little change beyond the first month of treatment. The real visual benefit needs further clarification.