Wellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine, School of Medicine, Dentistry & Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom; Department of Anatomy, Collage of Medicine-Rabigh Branch, King Abdulaziz University, Rabigh, Saudi Arabia.
Center for Medical Education, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom.
Surv Ophthalmol. 2018 Nov-Dec;63(6):816-850. doi: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2018.04.005. Epub 2018 Apr 27.
Retinal vein occlusion (RVO)-including central RVO, branch RVO, and hemicentral and hemispheric RVO-is the second most common vascular cause of visual loss, surpassed only by diabetic retinopathy. The presence and extent of retinal ischemia in RVO is associated with a worse prognosis. On this basis, most previously conducted studies considered ischemic retinal vein occlusion (iRVO) and non-iRVO as separate entities based on set thresholds of existing retinal ischemia as determined by fundus fluorescein angiography. Other diagnostic technologies have been used specifically in the differentiation of ischemic central retinal vein occlusion and nonischemic central retinal vein occlusion. To date, there is no fully accepted definition for iRVO. Some clinicians and researchers may favor establishing a clear differentiation between these forms of RVO; others may prefer not to consider iRVO as a separate entity. Whatever the case, retinal ischemia in RVO confers a higher risk of visual loss and neovascular complications; thus, it should be determined as accurately as possible in patients with this disease and be considered in clinical and experimental studies. Most recently conducted clinical trials evaluating new treatments for macular edema secondary to RVO included none or only few patients with iRVO based on previous definitions (i.e., few patients with sizeable areas of retinal ischemia were recruited in these trials), and thus it is unclear whether the results observed in recruited patients could be extrapolated to those with retinal ischemia. There has been scant research aiming at developing and/or testing treatments for retinal ischemia, as well as to prevent new vessel formation as a result of RVO. We provide a detailed review of the knowledge gathered over the years on iRVO, from controversies on its definition and diagnosis to the understanding of its epidemiology, risk factors and pathogenesis, the structural and functional effects of this disease in the eye and its complications, natural history, and outcomes after treatment. In each section, the definition of iRVO used is given so, independently of whether iRVO is considered a separate clinical entity or a more severe end of the spectrum of RVO, the information will be useful to clinicians to determine patient's risk, guide therapeutic decisions, and counsel patients and for researchers to design future studies.
视网膜静脉阻塞(RVO)——包括中央 RVO、分支 RVO、半中央和半球状 RVO——是仅次于糖尿病性视网膜病变的第二大常见血管性视力丧失原因。RVO 中视网膜缺血的存在和程度与预后较差相关。在此基础上,大多数先前进行的研究基于眼底荧光素血管造影确定的现有视网膜缺血的设定阈值,将缺血性视网膜静脉阻塞(iRVO)和非缺血性 RVO 视为两种独立的实体。其他诊断技术已专门用于区分缺血性和非缺血性中央视网膜静脉阻塞。迄今为止,iRVO 尚无完全被接受的定义。一些临床医生和研究人员可能倾向于明确区分这些形式的 RVO;其他人可能不希望将 iRVO 视为一种独立的实体。无论哪种情况,RVO 中的视网膜缺血都会增加视力丧失和新生血管并发症的风险;因此,应尽可能准确地确定患有这种疾病的患者的情况,并在临床和实验研究中考虑到这一点。最近进行的评估 RVO 继发黄斑水肿的新治疗方法的临床试验,基于先前的定义,没有或只有少数患者(即,这些试验中招募了少数有相当大面积视网膜缺血的患者)患有 iRVO,因此尚不清楚在招募的患者中观察到的结果是否可以推断为那些有视网膜缺血的患者。针对视网膜缺血的治疗方法的开发和/或测试以及预防 RVO 导致的新生血管形成的研究很少。我们详细回顾了多年来在 iRVO 方面积累的知识,从其定义和诊断的争议到对其流行病学、风险因素和发病机制、这种疾病对眼睛的结构和功能影响及其并发症、自然史以及治疗后的结果的理解。在每个部分中,都给出了使用的 iRVO 定义,因此,无论 iRVO 是否被视为一种独立的临床实体还是 RVO 谱的更严重的一端,这些信息对于临床医生确定患者的风险、指导治疗决策以及为患者提供咨询和为研究人员设计未来的研究都是有用的。