Vascular Analysis of Type 1, 2, and 3 Macular Neovascularization in Age-Related Macular Degeneration Using Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography Shows New Insights into Differences of Pathologic Vasculature and May Lead to a More Personalized Understanding.
MNV morphology
OCT angiography
age-related macular degeneration
choroidal neovascularization
imaging
Journal
Biomedicines
ISSN: 2227-9059
Titre abrégé: Biomedicines
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101691304
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 Mar 2022
17 Mar 2022
Historique:
received:
17
02
2022
revised:
14
03
2022
accepted:
16
03
2022
entrez:
25
3
2022
pubmed:
26
3
2022
medline:
26
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Background: The clinical appearance of macular neovascularization (MNV) in age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) varies widely, but so far, this has had no relevance in terms of therapeutic approaches or prognosis. Therefore, our purpose was to investigate if and which differences exist in the vascular architecture of MNV and to quantify them. Methods: In 90 patients with newly diagnosed nAMD, MNV was identified by means of optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA), and automated quantitative vascular analysis was carried out. The analyzed vascular parameters were area, flow, fractal dimension (FD), total vascular length (sumL), number of vascular nodes (numN), flow, and average vessel caliber (avgW). The current classification of MNVs divides them according to their localization into type 1 (grown from the choroid below the RPE), type 2 (grown from the choroid through RPE), and type 3 (grown from the retina toward the RPE). We compared the analyzed vascular parameters of each of the three MNV types. Kruskal−Wallis test was applied, Dunn test was performed for post hoc analysis, and for pairwise comparison, p-values were adjusted using Bonferroni comparison. Results: Regarding the MNV area, there was no significant difference between types 1 and 2, but type 3 was significantly smaller than types 1 and 2 (p < 0.00001). For FD, types 1 and 2 did not differ significantly, but again, type 3 was lower than type 1 and 2 (p < 0.00001). The numN were significantly higher in types 1 and 3 than in 2 (p < 0.005), but not between types 1 and 3. No significant differences were found between MNV types for flow. As for sumL, types 1 and 2 did not differ significantly, but type 3 was significantly lower than types 1 and 2 (p < 0.00001). For avgW, there was no significant difference between types 1 and 2 or between types 2 and 3, but type 3 was significantly larger than type 1 (p < 0.05). Conclusions OCTA yields detailed information on the vascular morphology of MNV in patients with nAMD and is able to show differences among types 1, 2, and 3. Especially comparing types 1 and 2 with type 3 reveals significant differences in area, FD, sumL, and numN. One explanation could be the similar pathogenesis of types 1 and 2 with their origin in the choroid and their growth towards the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE), whereas type 3 originates in the deep capillary plexus. Between types 1 and 2, however, only the numN differ significantly, which could be due to the fact that type 1 spreads horizontally below the RPE and, thus, display more vascular branching, while type 2 grows more vertically through the RPE and under the neurosensory retina. Detailed information about the pathologic vasculature is important for proper monitoring of the disease and to assess the efficacy of medication, especially with regard to new substances. This should be taken into consideration in future studies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35327496
pii: biomedicines10030694
doi: 10.3390/biomedicines10030694
pmc: PMC8945474
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Subventions
Organisme : CSRD VA
ID : 1
Pays : United States
Références
Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2021 May 6;7(1):31
pubmed: 33958600
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2021 Aug;259(8):2103-2111
pubmed: 33528650
Retina. 2020 Dec;40(12):2263-2269
pubmed: 32032255
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2019 Jul;257(7):1381-1392
pubmed: 31093765
Eye (Lond). 2019 Sep;33(9):1466-1471
pubmed: 30971814
Acta Ophthalmol. 2022 Mar;100(2):e512-e520
pubmed: 34159761
Life (Basel). 2021 Jul 29;11(8):
pubmed: 34440511
Exp Eye Res. 2021 Aug;209:108641
pubmed: 34058230
Ophthalmology. 2015 Dec;122(12):2532-44
pubmed: 26481819
Retina. 2021 Feb 1;41(2):287-295
pubmed: 32355125
Retina. 2001;21(5):416-34
pubmed: 11642370
Am J Ophthalmol. 2015 Oct;160(4):739-48.e2
pubmed: 26164826
Ophthalmologe. 2021 Feb;118(2):154-161
pubmed: 32601817
Retina. 2015 Nov;35(11):2212-8
pubmed: 26441269
Retina. 2018 Feb;38(2):220-230
pubmed: 28582276
Dev Ophthalmol. 2016;56:57-61
pubmed: 27023917
Am J Ophthalmol. 2021 May;225:57-68
pubmed: 33412121
Elife. 2013 Jun 18;2:e00324
pubmed: 23795287
Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2021 Sep 08;70:102826
pubmed: 34540215
Int J Mol Sci. 2021 Mar 27;22(7):
pubmed: 33801777
Ophthalmic Res. 2015;54(2):57-63
pubmed: 26201877
Br J Ophthalmol. 2017 May;101(5):597-602
pubmed: 27503396
Ophthalmology. 2020 May;127(5):616-636
pubmed: 31864668
Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2017 May 1;48(5):385-391
pubmed: 28499049
PLoS One. 2020 Aug 21;15(8):e0237785
pubmed: 32822371
Eye (Lond). 2015 Jul;29(7):932-5
pubmed: 25976641
Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2020 May;31(3):215-221
pubmed: 32205470
Ophthalmology. 2018 Feb;125(2):255-266
pubmed: 28964581
BMJ Open Ophthalmol. 2019 Dec 10;4(1):e000369
pubmed: 31909194
Ophthalmol Retina. 2017 Mar-Apr;1(2):124-136
pubmed: 28584883
Ophthalmic Genet. 2021 Dec;42(6):768-772
pubmed: 34486473
PLoS One. 2019 Apr 29;14(4):e0216304
pubmed: 31034505
Clin Ophthalmol. 2019 Dec 17;13:2527-2534
pubmed: 31908407
Ophthalmology. 1990 Feb;97(2):171-8
pubmed: 1691475
Acta Ophthalmol. 2017 Jun;95(4):414-420
pubmed: 28133946