Clinical Ophthalmology (Aug 2020)
The Central Subfoveal Bouquet in Idiopathic Epiretinal Membranes
Abstract
Nadyr A Damasceno,1,2 Eduardo F Damasceno,1,3 Nicolas A Yannuzzi,1 Ashley M Crane,1 Nidhi Relhan,1 William E Smiddy,1 Harry W Flynn Jr1 1Department of Ophthalmology, Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA; 2Department of Ophthalmology, Hospital Naval Marcilio Dias, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil; 3Department of Ophthalmology, Universidade Federal Fluminense, Niteroi, RJ, BrazilCorrespondence: Harry W Flynn JrBascom Palmer Eye Institute, 900 N.W. 17th Street, Miami, FL 33136, USATel +1 305-243-2020Email [email protected]: To report both the unoperated clinical course and the surgical outcomes of eyes with a central foveal bouquet (CB) secondary to idiopathic epiretinal membranes (iERMs).Design: Retrospective, consecutive, and observational case series.Methods: All patients examined between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2019, for evaluation of epiretinal membrane with a CB lesion identified on spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) were included. Exclusion criteria included vitreoretinal comorbidities associated with secondary ERMs and an absence of CB lesions on SD-OCT. Patients were divided into two groups: those who were followed with observation (Group I) and those who received surgery (Group II). Each group had 3 different types of mechanical abnormalities of the CB previously described as cotton ball sign, subfoveal detachment, or acquired vitelliform lesion, without a subanalysis discrimination.Main Outcome Measures: Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at baseline and last follow-up, subjective metamorphopsia, central retinal thickness (CMT), mechanical stress lesions of the CB, and resolution or evolution of the CB lesions during the follow-up interval.Results: Two hundred seventy-six eyes with iERM were reviewed, and 46 eyes met the inclusion criteria. Among these, 21 of 46 (46%) were observed, and 25 of 46 (54%) underwent surgery. Metamorphopsia was identified in 61.9% of patients in Group I and 81.2% of patients in Group II, at baseline. The mean BCVA was 0.19 ± 0.17 (20/30) in Group I and 0.31 ± 0.33 (20/40) in Group II at presentation. At the final exam, patients in Group I achieved a mean BCVA of 0.24 ± 0.18 (20/30), while patients in Group II obtained a mean BCVA of 0.15 ± 0.21 (20/30). Spontaneous resolution of the CB sign occurred in 5 of 21 eyes (23.8%) that were observed, whereas, after surgery, the CB sign resolved in 16 of 25 eyes (61.5%). Mean CMT was 422 ± 84.2μm in Group I and 531 ± 143.9μm in Group II, at baseline, while at the latest follow-up, the mean CMT was 400 ± 40.8μm in the cases followed with observation and 454 ± 148.7μm in the surgical cases.Conclusion: The clinical course and surgical outcomes of CB findings in iERM are favorable in terms of visual acuity. However, those receiving surgery had an increase in visual acuity and resolution of the CB abnormality.Keywords: foveal tractional lesions; idiopathic epiretinal membrane lesions; central foveal bouquet; clinical outcomes; surgical outcomes,
