Evidence Hub

Congenital simple hamartoma of the retinal pigment epithelium: a study of five cases

Shields CL, Shields JA, Marr BP, Sperber DE, Gass JD

Ophthalmology, 2003

90 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE: To report 5 patients with presumed congenital, simple hamartoma of the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE).

DESIGN: Retrospective, observational small case series.

PARTICIPANTS: Five patients with a black macular tumor of the RPE.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Initial tumor features, initial associated fundus features, tumor course on follow-up, and visual acuity outcome.

RESULTS: In all 5 cases, the tumor involved the macula and the mean distance to the foveola was 0.4 mm (median, 0.2 mm; range, 0.2-1.2 mm). In all cases, the tumor was darkly pigmented, with full-thickness retinal and RPE involvement and minimal protrusion into the vitreous cavity. The mean ultrasonographic tumor thickness was 1.6 mm (median, 1.4 mm; range, 1.1-2.5 mm). Associated features included minimally dilated retinal feeding artery and draining vein (100%), surrounding mild retinal traction (80%), retinal exudation (20%), and vitreous pigmented cells (20%). None of the lesions had associated subretinal fluid, macular edema, or macular hole. Visual acuity was 20/20 in 3 cases and slightly decreased in the other 2 cases because of foveal traction. The findings remained stable in 3 patients who had adequate follow-up. We chose to classify this lesion as congenital simple hamartoma of the RPE to differentiate it from combined hamartoma of the retina and RPE, congenital hypertrophy of the RPE, adenoma or adenocarcinoma of the RPE, and acquired hyperplasia of the RPE, which are different clinical entities.…

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.

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