Hyperbaric oxygen treatment for non-arteritic central retinal artery occlusion retrospective comparative analysis from two tertiary medical centres

Assaf Rozenberg*, Aviel Hadad, Alon Peled, Biana Dubinsky-Pertzov, Lior Or, Eva Eting, Shai Efrati, Eran Pras, Adi Einan-Lifshitz

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the visual outcome of patients treated for non-arthritic central retinal artery occlusion (CRAO) in a medical centre that uses hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) as part of the standard of care (SOC) to medical centres that does not. Methods: The study included data from two tertiary medical centres. The medical records of all patients diagnosed with non-arthritic CRAO without a patent cilioretinal artery between January 2010 and December 2018 in two tertiary medical centres were reviewed. Results: One hundred and twenty-one patients were treated by HBOT and 23 patients received only SOC. In the HBOT group, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improved from 2.89 ± 0.98 logMAR at presentation to 2.15 ± 1.07 logMAR upon the end of HBOT (P < 0.001), while the SOC group had no significant improvement, from 3.04 ± 0.82 logMAR at presentation to 2.80 ± 1.50 logMAR (P = 0.24). With adjustment for age, gender, and the duration of symptoms, final BCVA in the HBOT group was significantly better compared to the control group (P = 0.023). Rates of patients achieving vision of 20/200 or better were similar between groups (17.4% vs. 19.8%, P = 0.523). Conclusion: Utilizing HBOT as part of the SOC for CRAO improves the final visual outcome. HBOT is safe and can be implemented, if available, as part of SOC in all tertiary medical centres.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1261-1265
Number of pages5
JournalEye
Volume36
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2022
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Hyperbaric oxygen treatment for non-arteritic central retinal artery occlusion retrospective comparative analysis from two tertiary medical centres'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this