4.4 Article

CLINICAL FEATURES OF LACQUER CRACKS IN EYES WITH PATHOLOGIC MYOPIA

Journal

RETINA-THE JOURNAL OF RETINAL AND VITREOUS DISEASES
Volume 39, Issue 7, Pages 1265-1277

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000002168

Keywords

best-corrected visual acuity; Bruch's membrane; choroidal neovascularization; lacquer cracks; fundus autofluorescence; fluorescein angiography; indocyanine green angiography; optical coherence tomography; pathologic myopia

Categories

Funding

  1. Japanese Society for Promotion of Science [15H04993, 15K15629]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To analyze the morphologic features of lacquer cracks (LCs), compare their detectability by different imaging instruments, and determine their progressive pattern. Methods: The medical records of 47 highly myopic eyes of 33 patients with LCs were reviewed. Fundus fluorescein angiography was used as the primary method of identifying LCs, and the detection rate was compared with that by fundus autofluorescence and optical coherence tomography. Results: A total of 176 LCs were detected in the 47 eyes. Lacquer cracks were detected more frequently in the temporal (44.3%) than the inferior (30.7%), superior (17.0%), and nasal (8.0%) quadrants of the retina. The detection rate of LCs was 98% in fundus photographs and 85% by fundus autofluorescence and optical coherence tomography. A progression of the LCs was observed in 22 of the 41 eyes with a follow-up period of >= 1 year. The progression patterns were an increase in the number (18 of 41, including 5 eyes in which new LCs had a branching pattern), elongation (4 of 41), and progression to patchy atrophy (6 of 41). Conclusion: Lacquer cracks can be detected noninvasively by fundus autofluorescence and optical coherence tomography; however, improvements are necessary to detect all of the lesions. Lacquer cracks frequently progress with time, and an increase in the number of LCs was the most frequent progression pattern.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available