Abstract
Objectives: The etiology of central retinal artery occlusion (CRAO) is unclear in about 50% of patients, suggesting pathomechanical heterogeneity; moreover, little is known about outcomes according to etiology. This study investigated whether the presence of an embolic source affects outcome in CRAO.
Methods: CRAO patients within 7 days of symptom onset were retrospectively enrolled. Clinical parameters, including initial and 1-month visual acuity, CRAO subtype, and brain images, were reviewed. CRAO etiology was categorized as CRAO with or without an embolic source (CRAO-E+ and CRAO-E-). Visual improvement was defined as a decrease in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution ≥0.3 at 1 month.
Results: A total of 114 patients with CRAO were included. Visual improvement was noted in 40.4% of patients. Embolic sources were identified in 55.3% of patients, and visual improvement group rather than no improvement group was more commonly associated with the presence of an embolic source. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, CRAO-E+ independently predicted visual improvement (OR 3.00, 95% CI 1.15–7.81, P = 0.025).
Discussion: CRAO-E+ was found to be associated with a better outcome. CRAO-E+ may be more prone to recanalization than that CRAO-E-.
- Received November 29, 2022.
- Accepted in final form April 7, 2023.
- Copyright © 2023 American Academy of Neurology. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
Letters: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
You must ensure that your Disclosures have been updated within the previous six months. Please go to our Submission Site to add or update your Disclosure information.
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.
You May Also be Interested in
Costs and Utilization of New-to-Market Neurologic Medications
Dr. Robert J. Fox and Dr. Mandy Leonard