Evidence Hub

Bilateral Giant Pigment Epithelial Detachments and Unilateral RPE Tear and Exudative Retinal Detachment After Tadalafil Exposure: Case Report and Review of the Literature

Catarina Xavier, A. Toutée, Thomas Sales de Gauzy, Francesc March de Ribot, P. Forte, B. Bodaghi, E. Bousquet, Sarah Touhami

Retinal cases & brief reports, 2026

33 participants

Abstract

PURPOSE

To describe a case of bilateral giant pigment epithelial detachments (PEDs) complicated by unilateral giant retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) tear and macula-off exudative retinal detachment (RD) in the context of tadalafil exposure, and to place it in the spectrum of reported non-AMD giant RPE tears.

METHODS

Case report with multimodal imaging and comprehensive systemic work-up, combined with a focused literature review of exudative RD associated with giant RPE tears unrelated to age-related macular degeneration.

RESULTS

A 62-year-old man presented with blurred vision in the left eye. Examination revealed bilateral giant temporal PEDs and, in the left eye, a crescent-shaped giant RPE tear contiguous with an inferior macula-off exudative RD and bilateral pachychoroid on OCT. Extensive systemic and ocular investigations were unremarkable except for regular tadalafil use. Discontinuation of tadalafil led to rapid resolution of subretinal fluid and improvement of BCVA to 20/25 OS at one year, whereas re-exposure triggered recurrence of serous macular detachment. Using the Naranjo scale, the causal relationship between tadalafil and the ocular event was rated as "certain". Literature review identified 33 published patients (43 eyes) with exudative RD and giant RPE tears without AMD, most commonly associated with bullous CSC and other pachychoroid entities.

CONCLUSION

Bilateral giant PEDs with unilateral giant RPE tear and macula-off exudative RD can occur in the setting…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 33 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free