Evidence Hub

A cross-sectional study of fundus lesion characteristics in patients with acute visual impairment caused by COVID-19 infection

Jia Wei, Xiao Chen, Lihong Wang, Zhong-Hua Wang, Jun-Meng Li, Zhili Wang

Scientific Reports, 2024

48 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

To investigate the characteristics of acute visual dysfunction and fundus lesions in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. A retrospective case series study was conducted. Data from 48 patients (96 eyes) with COVID-19 infection who presented to our ophthalmology department with acute onset visual disturbance between December 5, 2022, and February 28, 2023 were collected. Asymptomatic patients and those who had already recovered were excluded. Data collected included patient demographics, ophthalmic examinations, multicolor imaging (MCI), infrared autofluorescence (IR), spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (OCT), fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA). Of the 48 patients, 15 were male and 33 were female, with a mean age of 32 years. All patients had bilateral involvement. OCT showed hyperreflective signals in the outer plexiform layer and outer nuclear layer of the macular region in all 96 eyes of 48 patients (100%). Additionally, 66 eyes of 33 patients (68.8%) of eyes demonstrated abnormal reflectivity in the ellipsoid and interdigitation zones. MCI revealed petaloid or wedge-shaped hyperreflective areas in the macula in 46 (47.9%) of eyes, corresponding to hyporeflective areas on IR. Cotton-wool spots were observed in the peripapillary or posterior pole area in 54 (56.3%) of eyes. COVID-19 infection can lead to acute, bilateral, symmetric, and widespread retinal damage. Characteristic findings can be observed in ophthalmological examinations such as OCT, MCI, and IR.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, 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: 48 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