Fluorescein angiography versus ERG for predicting the prognosis in central retinal vein occlusion.

PURPOSE

It is not easy to predict which patients with a central retinal vein occlusion will develop rubeosis and which will not. We have compared two methods for doing so, fluorescein angiography and full-field electroretinogram (ERG). Our aim was to improve our possibilities for predicting rubeosis in patients with central vein occlusion.

METHODS

32 patients with a central retinal vein occlusion with a duration of less than 14 days were included in the study. Fluorescein angiography and ERG were performed in all patients. The fluorescein angiograms were studied by two independent examiners in a masked mode. The patients were then followed for at least one year.

RESULTS

Development of rubeosis in patients with central retinal vein occlusion could be predicted by fluorescein angiography in 82% of the patients and with ERG in 94% of the patients. The non-ischemic central retinal vein occlusions were identified in 62% by fluorescein angiography and in 100% with ERG. Fluorescein angiography misjudged 9 patients 28%, whereas ERG only misjudged 1 patient, 3%.

CONCLUSION

ERG seems to be a better method for predicting the prognosis in central retinal vein occlusion than fluorescein angiography.