A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Acute optic neuritis: What are the clues to the aetiological diagnosis in real life? | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • Previous studies on acute optic neuritis (ON) often had equal patient groups, which doesn't reflect real-life occurrences, leaving it unclear what features effectively differentiate ON causes.
  • This study evaluated adult patients with recent acute ON to determine if clinical assessments, CSF analysis, and MRI imaging can help differentiate ON causes in a practical setting.
  • Results showed that factors like bilateral visual involvement and specific CSF and MRI findings were key in identifying ON types, while traditional eye tests showed no significant differences.

Article Abstract

Background: Previous cross-sectional studies have reported distinct clinical and radiological features among the different acute optic neuritis (ON) aetiologies. Nevertheless, these reports often included the same number of patients in each group, not taking into account the disparity in frequencies of ON aetiologies in a real-life setting and thus, it remains unclear what are the truly useful features for distinguishing the different ON causes. To determine whether clinical evaluation, ophthalmological assessment including the optical coherence tomography (OCT), CSF analysis, and MRI imaging may help to discriminate the different causes of acute ON in a real-life cohort.

Methods: In this prospective monocentric study, adult patients with recent acute ON (<1 month) underwent evaluation at baseline and 1 and 12 months, including, high- and low-contrast visual acuity, visual field assessment and OCT measurements, baseline CSF analysis and MRI.

Results: Among 108 patients, 71 (65.7%) had multiple sclerosis (MS), 19 (17.6%) had idiopathic ON, 13 (12.0%) and 5 (4.6%) had myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein and aquaporin-4 antibodies, at last follow up respectively.At baseline, the distribution of bilateral ON, CSF-restricted oligoclonal bands, optic perineuritis, optic nerve length lesions and positive dissemination in space and dissemination in time criteria on MRI were significantly different between the four groups (p <0.001). No significant difference in visual acuity nor inner retinal layer thickness was found between the different ON aetiologies.

Conclusions: In this large prospective study, bilateral visual involvement, CSF and MRI results are the most useful clues in distinguishing the different aetiologies of acute ON, whereas ophthalmological assessments including OCT measurements revealed no significant difference between the aetiologies.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.msard.2023.104764DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

acute optic
8
optic neuritis
8
acute
4
neuritis clues
4
clues aetiological
4
aetiological diagnosis
4
diagnosis real
4
real life?
4
life? background
4
background previous
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!