Verghese Ashwin P, Lasalle Claudia C, Ramsey David J
Division of Ophthalmology, Department of Surgery, UMass Chan - Lahey School of Medicine, Burlington, Massachusetts.
Department of Ophthalmology, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Ophthalmol Sci. 2025 May 26;5(6):100835. doi: 10.1016/j.xops.2025.100835. eCollection 2025 Nov-Dec.
To assess the diagnostic utility of dark adaptometry (DA) rod intercept time (RIT) to differentiate age-related macular degeneration (AMD) from central serous chorioretinopathy (CSCR).
Retrospective consecutive case series.
Consecutive patients with a clinical diagnosis of AMD or CSCR who were ≥50 years of age.
The study included patients who had completed a DA study in ≥1 eye measured at 5° superior to the fovea on the retina. All patients underwent a comprehensive retina examination, including OCT assessment of the macula.
Patients were classified based on their RIT, with an RIT >6.50 minutes considered a delay.
The study included 67 patients with AMD and 25 with CSCR. Patients with AMD tended to be older (73.8 ± 8.9 years vs. 65.0 ± 7.2 years, < 0.001) and were more likely female (53.7% vs. 28.0%, = 0.049) compared with their CSCR counterparts. Additionally, patients with AMD tended to exhibit poorer vision in both their better-seeing (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution 0.14 ± 0.13 vs. 0.08 ± 0.13, = 0.057) and worse-seeing (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution 0.48 ± 0.47 vs. 0.26 ± 0.25, = 0.028) eyes. Rod intercept times were slower in patients with AMD compared with CSCR, both in the faster-adapting (12.44 ± 6.96 minutes vs. 4.01 ± 1.28 minutes, < 0.001) and slower-adapting (13.06 ± 6.67 minutes vs. 4.95 ± 1.78 minutes, < 0.001) eyes. Using a delayed RIT in the faster-adapting eye to classify patients with AMD versus CSCR showed excellent performance with a sensitivity of 79.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 67.4%-88.1%) and perfect specificity of 100.0% (95% CI: 86.3%-100.0%), yielding an accuracy of 97.4% (95% CI: 91.7%-99.6%). After adjusting for age, sex, and visual acuity, RIT in the faster-adapting eye remained an independent predictor of AMD versus CSCR.
Prolonged dark adaptation, indicated by a longer RIT, is capable of distinguishing individuals with AMD from CSCR, 2 conditions that share similar fundus features. Future investigations are warranted to assess the effectiveness of this noninvasive technique for AMD screening.
Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
评估暗适应测量法(DA)的视杆细胞截获时间(RIT)在鉴别年龄相关性黄斑变性(AMD)与中心性浆液性脉络膜视网膜病变(CSCR)方面的诊断效用。
回顾性连续病例系列研究。
年龄≥50岁、临床诊断为AMD或CSCR的连续患者。
该研究纳入了在视网膜中央凹上方5°处至少一只眼完成DA研究的患者。所有患者均接受了全面的视网膜检查,包括黄斑的光学相干断层扫描(OCT)评估。
根据患者的RIT进行分类,RIT>6.50分钟被视为延迟。
该研究纳入了67例AMD患者和25例CSCR患者。与CSCR患者相比,AMD患者年龄更大(73.8±8.9岁 vs. 65.0±7.2岁,P<0.001),女性比例更高(53.7% vs. 28.0%,P = 0.049)。此外,AMD患者在视力较好眼(最小分辨角对数0.14±0.13 vs. 0.08±0.13,P = 0.057)和视力较差眼(最小分辨角对数0.48±0.47 vs. 0.26±0.25,P = 0.028)的视力往往更差。与CSCR患者相比,AMD患者的视杆细胞截获时间在快速适应眼(12.44±6.96分钟 vs. 4.01±1.28分钟,P<0.001)和慢速适应眼(13.06±6.67分钟 vs. 4.95±1.78分钟,P<0.001)均较慢。使用快速适应眼的延迟RIT对AMD患者与CSCR患者进行分类,表现出色,敏感性为79.1%(95%置信区间[CI]:67.4%-88.1%),特异性为100.0%(95%CI:86.3%-100.0%),准确率为97.4%(95%CI:91.7%-99.6%)。在调整年龄、性别和视力后,快速适应眼的RIT仍然是AMD与CSCR的独立预测指标。
较长的RIT表明暗适应延长,这能够区分患有AMD和CSCR的个体,这两种疾病具有相似的眼底特征。有必要进行进一步研究以评估这种非侵入性技术用于AMD筛查的有效性。
在本文末尾的脚注和披露中可能会找到专有或商业披露信息。