Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Functional assessment of the fundus autofluorescence pattern in Best vitelliform macular dystrophy

  • Retinal Disorders
  • Published:
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To identify the fundus autofluorescence (FAF) patterns in Best vitelliform macular dystrophy (VMD).

Methods

Patients affected by VMD in vitelliform, pseudohypopyon, and vitelliruptive stages underwent a complete ophthalmological examination, including best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), short-wavelength FAF (SW-FAF), near-infrared FAF (NIR-FAF) and microperimetry. Main outcome measures: the identification of the correlation between SW-FAF and NIR-FAF patterns of the foveal region with BCVA, and central retinal sensitivity in eyes affected by VMD. The secondary outcomes included the definition of the frequency of foveal patterns on SW-FAF and NIR-FAF.

Results

Thirty-seven of 64 (58 %), 8 of 64 (12.5 %) and 19 of 64 (29.5 %) eyes showed vitelliform, pseudohypopyon, and vitelliruptive stages respectively. Three main FAF patterns were identified on both techniques: hyper-autofluorescent pattern, hypo-autofluorescent pattern, and patchy pattern. BCVA was significantly different in eyes with hypo-autofluorescent and patchy patterns with respect to eyes showing a hyper-autofluorescent pattern. Similar differences were registered in the FS according to SW-FAF classification. However, the FS differed in each subgroup in the NIR-FAF analysis. Subgroup analyses were performed on the patchy pattern, combining FAF and fundus abnormalities. Considering both FAF techniques, the BCVA differed between the vitelliform and pseudohypopyon stages, and between the vitelliform and vitelliruptive stages. In the NIR-FAF classification, there was a significant statistical difference in the FS between each subgroup; in the SW-FAF, there was a significant difference between the vitelliform and pseudohypopyon stages and the vitelliform and vitelliruptive stages.

Conclusions

Three main FAF patterns can be identified in VMD. The patchy pattern is the most frequent, accounting for 70 % of eyes on SW-FAF and 80 % of eyes on NIR-FAF. A tighter correlation links the classification of NIR-FAF patterns and FS. Longitudinal investigations are warranted to evaluate the course of FAF patterns and their role in disease monitoring.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Best F (1905) Uber eine hereditäre Maculaaffektion. Beiträge zur Vererbungslehre. Z Augenheilk 13:199–212

    Google Scholar 

  2. Gass JDM (1997) Best’s disease. In: Stereoscopic atlas of macular disease. Diagnosis and treatment. Mosby, St. Louis, pp 304–313

    Google Scholar 

  3. Deutman AF, Hoyng CB (2001) Macular dystrophies. In: Ryan SJ (ed) Retina. Mosby, St. Louis, pp 1210–1257

    Google Scholar 

  4. Boon CJ, Jeroen Klevering B, Keunen JE et al (2008) Fundus autofluorescence imaging of retinal dystrophies. Vision Res 48:2569–2577

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ferrara DC, Costa RA, Tsang S et al (2010) Multimodal fundus imaging in Best vitelliform macular dystrophy. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 248:1377–1386

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Kay CN, Abramoff MD, Mullins RF et al (2012) Three-dimensional distribution of the vitelliform lesion, photoreceptors, and retinal pigment epithelium in the macula of patients with best vitelliform macular dystrophy. Arch Ophthalmol 130:357–364

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Keilhauer CN, Delori FC (2006) Near-infrared autofluorescence imaging of the fundus: visualization of ocular melanin. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 47:3556–3564

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Weinberger AWA, Lappas A, Kirchkamp T et al (2006) Fundus near infrared fluorescence correlates with fundus near infrared reflectance. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 47:3098–3108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cideciyan AV, Swider M, Aleman TS et al (2007) Reduced-illuminance autofluorescence imaging in ABCA4-associated retinal degenerations. J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis 24:1457–1467

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Kellner S, Kellner U, Weber BH et al (2009) Lipofuscin- and melanin-related fundus autofluorescence in patients with ABCA4-associated retinal dystrophies. Am J Ophthalmol 147:895–902, 902.e1

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Parodi MB, Iacono P, Pedio M et al (2008) Autofluorescence in adult-onset foveomacular vitelliform dystrophy. Retina 28:801–807

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Petrukhin K, Koisti MJ, Bakall B et al (1998) Identification of the gene responsible for best macular dystrophy. Nat Genet 19:241–247

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bakall B, Radu RA, Stanton JB et al (2007) Enhanced accumulation of A2E in individuals homozygous or heterozygous for mutations in BEST1 (VMD2). Exp Eye Res 85:34–43

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Frangieh GT, Green WR, Fine SL (1982) A histopathologic study of Best’s macular dystrophy. Arch Ophthalmol 100:1115–1121

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mullins RF, Kuehn MH, Faidley EA et al (2007) Differential macular and peripheral expression of bestrophin in human eyes and its implication for best disease. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 48:3372–3380

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mullins RF, Oh KT, Heffron E et al (2005) Late development of vitelliform lesions and flecks in a patient with best disease: clinicopathologic correlation. Arch Ophthalmol 123:1588–1594

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. O’Gorman S, Flaherty WA, Fishman GA, Berson EL (1988) Histopathologic findings in Best’s vitelliform macular dystrophy. Arch Ophthalmol 106:1261–1268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Weingeist TA, Kobrin JL, Watzke RC (1982) Histopathology of Best’s macular dystrophy. Arch Ophthalmol 100:1108–1114

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Wabbels B, Preising MN, Kretschmann U et al (2006) Genotype–phenotype correlation and longitudinal course in ten families with Best vitelliform macular dystrophy. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 244:1453–1466

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Renner AB, Tillack H, Kraus H et al (2005) Late onset is common in Best macular dystrophy associated with VMD2 gene mutations. Ophthalmology 112:586–592

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Spaide RF, Noble K, Morgan A, Freund KB (2006) Vitelliform macular dystrophy. Ophthalmology 113:1392–1400

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Mohler CW, Fine SL (1981) Long-term evaluation of patients with Best’s vitelliform dystrophy. Ophthalmology 88:688–692

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Boon CJ, Theelen T, Hoefsloot EH et al (2009) Clinical and molecular genetic analysis of best vitelliform macular dystrophy. Retina 29:835–847

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Wang Z, Dillon J, Gaillard ER (2006) Antioxidant properties of melanin in retinal pigment epithelial cells. Photochem Photobiol 82:474–479

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Boulton M, Dayhaw-Barker P (2001) The role of the retinal pigment epithelium: topographical variation and ageing changes. Eye 15:384–389

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Finnemann SC, Leung LW, Rodriguez-Boulan E (2002) The lipofuscin component A2E selectively inhibits phagolysosomal degradation of photoreceptor phospholipid by the retinal pigment epithelium. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99:3842–3847

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Hoppe G, O’Neil J, Hoff HF, Sears J (2004) Products of lipid peroxidation induce missorting of the principal lysosomal protease in retinal pigment epithelium. Biochim Biophys Acta 1689:33–41

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The contribution of the Fondazione Bietti in this paper was supported by the Ministry of Health and Fondazione Roma.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ophthalmology, Scientific Institute San Raffaele, University Vita-Salute, Milano, Italy

    Maurizio Battaglia Parodi, Claudia Del Turco, Giacinto Triolo & Francesco Bandello

  2. Fondazione G. B. Bietti per l’Oftalmologia, IRCCS (Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico), Via Livenza 3, Rome, Italy

    Pierluigi Iacono

Authors
  1. Maurizio Battaglia Parodi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pierluigi Iacono
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Claudia Del Turco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Giacinto Triolo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Francesco Bandello
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pierluigi Iacono.

Ethics declarations

Funding

No funding was received for this research.

Conflict of Interest

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers’ bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or non-financial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge, or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Parodi, M.B., Iacono, P., Del Turco, C. et al. Functional assessment of the fundus autofluorescence pattern in Best vitelliform macular dystrophy. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 254, 1297–1302 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-015-3194-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-015-3194-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation