Premium
Method for comparative evaluation of therapeutic efficacy in dry AMD patients using 3D‐CTAG
Author(s) -
MILYUTKINA S,
FINK W,
KOVALEVSKAYA M
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
acta ophthalmologica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.534
H-Index - 87
eISSN - 1755-3768
pISSN - 1755-375X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1755-3768.2014.f062.x
Subject(s) - docosahexaenoic acid , eicosapentaenoic acid , zeaxanthin , medicine , lutein , zoology , chemistry , gastroenterology , fatty acid , food science , biochemistry , biology , polyunsaturated fatty acid , carotenoid
Purpose Evaluation of therapeutic efficacy in dry AMD patients using 3DComputer‐automated Threshold Amsler Grid testing (3D‐CTAG; Fink &Sadun, 2004). Methods Dry AMD patients (n=87, 174 eyes). Group#1 (n=29): 200 mg Docosahexaenoic Acid (DHA) and 300 mg Eicosapentaenoic Acid (EPA). Group #2 (n=29): Lutein (12 mg) and Zeaxanthin (0,5 mg). Controls (n=29). 3D‐CTAG testing after 3 months of treatment.Indices: number of VF defects per eye (ND),lowest perceivablecontrast level (CL), absolute volume lost (AVL), VF volume lost relative to hill‐of‐vision (VLRH). Results Group#1: ND=0,31±0,54 (before) down to 0,16±0,37(after treatment); CL=12,31±8,03% down to 10,9±7,21%; VLRH=1,2±1,14% down to 0,26±0,52%.Group#2: ND=0,29±0,5 down to 0,21±0,41; CL=11,72±12,79% down to 9,66±10,2%; VLRH=1,01±0,88% down to 0,68±1,14%. Controls: ND=0,29±0,5 up to 0,34±0,51; CL=13,79±8,65% up to 14,38±10,38%; VLRH=0,93±0,9% up to 1,22±1,21%. Conclusion We demonstrated with 3D‐CTAG a decrease of VLRH of 0,94% (p=0,01) in group#1 after 3 months DHA/EPA treatment compared to 0,33% (p=0,05) in group#2, and an increase of VLRH of 0,29% (p=0,01) in the controls. This seems to indicate that DHA/EPA treatment of dry AMD may be more effective than Lutein‐Zeaxanthin therapy.Commercial interest