3.9 Article

Treatment of Optic Neuritis by Plasma Exchange (Add-On) in Neuromyelitis Optica

期刊

ARCHIVES OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
卷 130, 期 7, 页码 858-862

出版社

AMER MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1001/archophthalmol.2012.1126

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To assess the contribution of plasma exchange (PE) in association (add-on) with pulsed intravenous corticosteroids in acute optic neuritis of neuromyelitis optica (NMO) and limited forms of NMO. Methods: Thirty-six patients with optic neuritis were treated from January 1, 1995, through December 31, 2010, with pulsed intravenous corticosteroids and 16 with pulsed intravenous corticosteroids plus PE. The ophthalmologic examination was performed at least 6 months after optic neuritis treatment. Visual acuity and visual field assessed with the Snellen scale and the logarithmic scale of the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study were measured using standard automated perimetry and frequency doubling technology perimetry. Retinal peripapillary fiber thickness was measured using optical coherence tomography. Results: Final visual acuity was 20/400 in the corticosteroid group and 20/50 in the PE group (P=.04). The gain in visual acuity was 20/200 in the corticosteroid group and 20/30 in the PE group (P=.01). A poor final visual acuity outcome (<= 20/200) was found in 19 of 36 patients (53%) in the corticosteroid group and 2 of 16 patients (13%) in the PE group (P=.008). Mean (SD) thickness of peripapillary retinal nervous fibers was 63.1(20.4) mu m in the corticosteroid group and 70.3(20.3) mu m in the PE group (P=.16). The mean (SD) thickness in the temporal quadrant was 38.5(14.1) mu m in the corticosteroid group and 44.5(12.7) mu m in the PE group (P=.02). In multivariate analysis, PE treatment was the only independent factor associated with a visual acuity greater than 20/200. Conclusion: In optic neuritis associated with NMO, sequential treatment with pulsed intravenous corticosteroids and PE is more effective than standard monotherapy with corticosteroids on visual acuity outcome.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据