• Vitreoretinal Interface Abnormalities in Healthy Adults

    Written By: Jean Shaw and selected by Andrew P. Schachat, MD

    Journal Highlights

    Ophthalmology Retina, May/June 2017

    Download PDF

    In a study carried out at 17 ophthal­mology services throughout Spain, Zapata et al. assessed the prevalence of vitreoretinal interface abnormali­ties in a general population of healthy adults who were older than age 45. The authors found that a significant proportion—2.7%—of those evaluated showed vitreoretinal interface abnor­malities. As a result, they recommend that ophthalmologists screen patients, particularly those who are older, with optical coherence tomography (OCT) during any first routine consultation or preoperative assessment.

    For this cross-sectional study, the researchers evaluated 2,257 people, using spectral-domain OCT (SD-OCT) or swept-source OCT (SS-OCT). The participants’ mean age was 59.5 years (range, 45-90), and a total of 4,490 eyes were evaluated. Approximately two-thirds of the participants were women (n = 1,517). The researchers used the International Vitreomacular Traction Study Group’s OCT-based anatomic classification system to evaluate their findings. All images were sent to a read­ing center to be evaluated; a total of 227 cases were handled in this manner.

    All told, vitreoretinal interface abnormalities were found in 70 eyes (1.6%) of 61 patients (2.7%), and vitreomacular adhesion was detected in 1,317 eyes (29.3%). In addition, vitreomacular traction was observed in 14 participants (0.6%), epiretinal membrane (ERM) was noted in 44 (1.9%), and lamellar macular hole was observed in 3 (0.1%). The prevalence of vitreoretinal interface abnormalities increased with age, from 0.1% in those between the ages of 45 and 55 to 7.2% in those who were 75 and older.

    Limitations of the study include the use of 4 different OCT devices and different scanning protocols. In addition, the OCT reading center was established specifically for this study, and the authors acknowledge that even though the readers were meticulously trained in the international classifica­tion system, such a reading center is not as neutral or professional as a formal or commercial reading center would be.

    The original article can be found here.