Efficacy and safety of hyperbaric oxygen therapy monitored by fluorescein angiography in patients with retinal artery occlusion.

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Jeremy Chiabo, Andreas Kauert, Barbara Casolla, Julie Contenti, Sacha Nahon-Esteve, Stephanie Baillif, Martel Arnaud
{"title":"Efficacy and safety of hyperbaric oxygen therapy monitored by fluorescein angiography in patients with retinal artery occlusion.","authors":"Jeremy Chiabo, Andreas Kauert, Barbara Casolla, Julie Contenti, Sacha Nahon-Esteve, Stephanie Baillif, Martel Arnaud","doi":"10.1136/bjo-2023-323972","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To assess the efficacy and safety of a standardised hyperbaric oxygen therapy protocol (HBOT) monitored by fluorescein angiography (FA) in patients with retinal artery occlusion (RAO).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>It is a prospective, non-comparative, monocentric study conducted between July 2016 and March 2022. All consecutive patients diagnosed with RAO within 7 days underwent visual acuity measurement, FA, macular optical coherence tomography (OCT) and OCT-angiography. They received two daily HBOT sessions (2.5 atmosphere absolute, 90 min) until revascularisation assessed by FA. Complete ophthalmic follow-up was scheduled at day 14, day 21 and at 1 month. The main outcome measure was a best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improvement defined as a decrease ≥0.3 logMAR at 1 month.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-one patients were included and received a mean number of 33.9 (13-56) HBOT sessions. Retinal revascularisation was observed in 48.4% and 87.1% of patients at days 14 and 21, respectively. The mean BCVA on referral and at 1 month was 1.51 logMAR and 1.10 logMAR, respectively. Fifteen (48.4%) patients achieved the main outcome measure. Six (19.4%) patients experienced minor barotrauma that did not require HBOT discontinuation. The univariate analysis showed that antiplatelet-treated patients (p=0.044) and patients with a poor initial BCVA (p=0.008) were more likely to achieve a BCVA improvement. OCT-angiography was not sensitive enough to diagnose RAO or assess revascularisation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In RAO patients monitored by FA until spontaneous revascularisation of the central retinal artery, HBOT was effective and safe.</p>","PeriodicalId":9313,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11228221/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo-2023-323972","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: To assess the efficacy and safety of a standardised hyperbaric oxygen therapy protocol (HBOT) monitored by fluorescein angiography (FA) in patients with retinal artery occlusion (RAO).

Methods: It is a prospective, non-comparative, monocentric study conducted between July 2016 and March 2022. All consecutive patients diagnosed with RAO within 7 days underwent visual acuity measurement, FA, macular optical coherence tomography (OCT) and OCT-angiography. They received two daily HBOT sessions (2.5 atmosphere absolute, 90 min) until revascularisation assessed by FA. Complete ophthalmic follow-up was scheduled at day 14, day 21 and at 1 month. The main outcome measure was a best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improvement defined as a decrease ≥0.3 logMAR at 1 month.

Results: Thirty-one patients were included and received a mean number of 33.9 (13-56) HBOT sessions. Retinal revascularisation was observed in 48.4% and 87.1% of patients at days 14 and 21, respectively. The mean BCVA on referral and at 1 month was 1.51 logMAR and 1.10 logMAR, respectively. Fifteen (48.4%) patients achieved the main outcome measure. Six (19.4%) patients experienced minor barotrauma that did not require HBOT discontinuation. The univariate analysis showed that antiplatelet-treated patients (p=0.044) and patients with a poor initial BCVA (p=0.008) were more likely to achieve a BCVA improvement. OCT-angiography was not sensitive enough to diagnose RAO or assess revascularisation.

Conclusion: In RAO patients monitored by FA until spontaneous revascularisation of the central retinal artery, HBOT was effective and safe.

通过荧光素血管造影术监测高压氧疗法对视网膜动脉闭塞患者的疗效和安全性。
目的:评估通过荧光素血管造影(FA)监测的标准化高压氧治疗方案(HBOT)对视网膜动脉闭塞(RAO)患者的疗效和安全性:这是一项前瞻性、非比较性、单中心研究,于2016年7月至2022年3月期间进行。所有在 7 天内确诊为 RAO 的连续患者都接受了视力测量、FA、黄斑光学相干断层扫描(OCT)和 OCT 血管造影术。他们每天接受两次 HBOT 治疗(2.5 个大气压,90 分钟),直到 FA 评估出血管再通为止。第14天、第21天和1个月时进行了全面的眼科随访。主要结果指标是最佳矫正视力(BCVA)的改善,即 1 个月时视力下降≥0.3 logMAR:31名患者接受了平均33.9(13-56)次HBOT治疗。在第 14 天和第 21 天,分别有 48.4% 和 87.1% 的患者观察到视网膜血管再通。转诊时和1个月后的平均BCVA分别为1.51 logMAR和1.10 logMAR。15名患者(48.4%)达到了主要结果指标。6名患者(19.4%)出现了轻微的气压创伤,但无需停止 HBOT。单变量分析显示,抗血小板治疗的患者(p=0.044)和初始 BCVA 较差的患者(p=0.008)更有可能获得 BCVA 改善。OCT血管造影对诊断RAO或评估血管再通的敏感度不够:结论:在视网膜中央动脉自发血管再通之前,通过FA监测的RAO患者中,HBOT是有效和安全的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
2.40%
发文量
213
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Ophthalmology (BJO) is an international peer-reviewed journal for ophthalmologists and visual science specialists. BJO publishes clinical investigations, clinical observations, and clinically relevant laboratory investigations related to ophthalmology. It also provides major reviews and also publishes manuscripts covering regional issues in a global context.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信