2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.neurad.2014.02.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interest of local intra-arterial fibrinolysis in acute central retinal artery occlusion: Clinical experience in 16 patients

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
10
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Unfortunately, a reliable improvement in visual function has not been demonstrated in patients treated with thrombolytics following acute retinal ischemia (89,90); no significant improvement in visual function following administration of tPA was reported in a number of retrospective reviews and observational studies (9193), however other observational studies, case reports, and retrospective reviews have suggested that visual function improved following administration of tPA (94101). It is possible that the low rate of vision improvement reported in most studies is related to the time between onset of visual symptoms and the administration of thrombolytics (72,96,101105); in most studies, thrombolytics were administered more than 12 hours after vision loss. However, a recent study examining the data from five retrospective case series of patients diagnosed with CRAO and treated with either urokinase (45 patients) or tPA (73 patients) failed to find a relationship between improvement in visual function and the time from onset of visual symptoms to treatment (106).…”
Section: Treatment Of Acute Retinal Ischemia (Crao or Brao)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unfortunately, a reliable improvement in visual function has not been demonstrated in patients treated with thrombolytics following acute retinal ischemia (89,90); no significant improvement in visual function following administration of tPA was reported in a number of retrospective reviews and observational studies (9193), however other observational studies, case reports, and retrospective reviews have suggested that visual function improved following administration of tPA (94101). It is possible that the low rate of vision improvement reported in most studies is related to the time between onset of visual symptoms and the administration of thrombolytics (72,96,101105); in most studies, thrombolytics were administered more than 12 hours after vision loss. However, a recent study examining the data from five retrospective case series of patients diagnosed with CRAO and treated with either urokinase (45 patients) or tPA (73 patients) failed to find a relationship between improvement in visual function and the time from onset of visual symptoms to treatment (106).…”
Section: Treatment Of Acute Retinal Ischemia (Crao or Brao)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Seventy-six articles were identified as being relevant to our topic. Twenty-one relevant studies were included as they were containing five or more patients treated with IAT for acute non-arteritic CRAO ( 14 25 , 29 – 34 ). Of these, nine were excluded either for not being written in English, representing duplicate data, or both.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In total, 12 English language studies were identified as being relevant to the topic of discussion and satisfying all criteria for review. Eleven of these studies were retrospective in nature and one was a randomized controlled trial ( 14 25 ). A total of 417 patients treated with IAT are presented.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The study publication dates ranged from 1992 to 2013 and subject level data were obtained for 118 patients (table 1) [10,11,12,13,14]. Another study conducted by Framme et al [15] was also identified; however, due to a language barrier, it was omitted from this study.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Values for profoundly low visual acuity scores were subsequently converted to a logMAR scale in accordance with the technique described by Lange et al [9]. Mercier et al [10] included a profoundly low visual acuity choice of ‘see steady hand' that was not quantified by Lange et al A logMAR score equal to 2.13 was chosen to quantify this option as it represented a profoundly low visual acuity ranging between counting fingers (logMAR = 1.98) and hand movement (logMAR = 2.28).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%