2021
DOI: 10.1080/08164622.2021.1878860
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Monitoring healing of accidental laser burns of the macula using optical coherence tomography

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
0
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 11 publications
1
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Comparison of multiple lasered regions within the same eye further confirmed the absence of interference between different lasered areas; no variability in laser outcome was noted, whether or not a strong or a mild DC laser was used in the adjacent lasered region (Figure 4, C and D, and Supplemental Figure 5). Qualitative analysis of SD-OCT images suggested increased thickness of the inner retina, likely caused by edematous changes immediately after the laser injury -as suggested previously (32) -and by retinal remodeling at later time points (33). OPL and HCC layers were visible for all 12 weeks after 1% DC laser (Figure 4, F-K) but were not visible after 1.5% DC laser injury (Figure 4, K-P) or 2% and 3% DC (Supplemental Figure 6, A-D), suggesting that DC laser higher than 1% disrupted INL organization, even though its thickness was maintained.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 75%
“…Comparison of multiple lasered regions within the same eye further confirmed the absence of interference between different lasered areas; no variability in laser outcome was noted, whether or not a strong or a mild DC laser was used in the adjacent lasered region (Figure 4, C and D, and Supplemental Figure 5). Qualitative analysis of SD-OCT images suggested increased thickness of the inner retina, likely caused by edematous changes immediately after the laser injury -as suggested previously (32) -and by retinal remodeling at later time points (33). OPL and HCC layers were visible for all 12 weeks after 1% DC laser (Figure 4, F-K) but were not visible after 1.5% DC laser injury (Figure 4, K-P) or 2% and 3% DC (Supplemental Figure 6, A-D), suggesting that DC laser higher than 1% disrupted INL organization, even though its thickness was maintained.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 75%