Highlights
-
•
Not all patients with spontaneously resolved acute CSCR gain good vision.
-
•
Older age, bilateral CSCR, absence of serous PED and poorer baseline visual acuity are predictors of failure to achieve 20/20 vision in spontaneously resolved acute CSCR.
-
•
Predictors of incomplete visual recovery highlight the importance of careful prognostication and functional assessment in these cases.
Purpose
This study investigated factors that lead to failure to achieve 20/20 visual acuity (VA) in patients with spontaneously-resolved acute CSCR.
Design
Multicenter retrospective observational cohort study
Methods
In this study, data were collected from 189 patients with first episode, spontaneously resolved acute CSCR in collaboration with the Macula Society CSCR Study Group (MICRoN). Patients were categorized based on post-resolution best-recorded visual acuity (BRVA) as better or worse than 20/20. Demographic characteristics and multimodal imaging features were analyzed to identify pertinent baseline biomarkers. Multivariate logistic regression identified several factors that were associated with <20/20 VA after resolution.
Results
This study included 195 eyes (189 patients), of whom 108 eyes (55.38%) achieved ≥20/20 VA and 87 (44.62%) demonstrated <20/20 VA. The mean age of patients was 45.45 ± 10.84 years, and 139 (73.54%) were males. Multivariate logistic regression showed older age (OR = 1.07, 95% CI: 1.03-1.11; P =.001), poor baseline VA (OR = 1.37, 95% CI: 1.15-1.63; p <.001), absence of serous pigment epithelial detachment (PED) (OR = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.09-0.95; P =.040) and bilaterality (OR = 4.12, 95% CI: 1.33-12.74; P =.014) were independent predictors of <20/20 VA post-resolution.
Conclusion
Resolution of SRF in acute CSCR does not uniformly translate into 20/20 vision. Older age, poorer baseline BRVA, absence of serous PED, and bilateral CSCR were independent predictors of failure to achieve 20/20 vision after resolution. These findings highlight the importance of careful prognostication and functional assessment in cases of acute, single-episode CSCR.
Introduction
C entral serous chorioretinopathy (CSCR) is a common retinal disorder typically affecting middle-aged men and is associated with risk factors such as type-A personality trait, hypertension, sleep disorders, and corticosteroid use. The natural history of acute CSCR is generally considered favorable, with spontaneous resolution of SRF within 3–4 months in the majority of cases. Initial observation remains the standard management for most first-episode acute CSCR. However, approximately 50% of cases may recur, and nearly 15% may progress to chronic disease, with or without persistent SRF. Epidemiologic studies estimate an annual incidence of approximately 10 per 100,000 in men and 1.7 per 100,000 in women.
Acute CSCR commonly presents with sudden central visual disturbance, metamorphopsia, micropsia, and relative scotoma, although some patients remain asymptomatic. While many eyes demonstrate complete resolution of SRF, visual recovery does not always parallel anatomical improvement . A substantial proportion of patients fail to regain 20/20 visual acuity (VA) despite favorable anatomical outcomes. Even in eyes with apparent structural recovery on imaging, residual visual impairment may persist, indicating that anatomical resolution alone does not reliably predict functional visual recovery.
Factors influencing incomplete visual recovery in spontaneously resolved acute CSCR are not well defined especially in large multicenter cohorts of first-episode, untreated, resolved disease using clinically meaningful visual acuity thresholds. Emerging evidence suggests that subtle outer retinal damage postresolution involving the outer retinal layers, contributes to suboptimal visual recovery in spontaneously resolved CSCR. However, patients with spontaneous anatomical resolution and apparently normal retinal structure still experience incomplete visual recovery. In this study, postresolution incomplete visual recovery was defined as BRVA worse than 20/20. Finer aspects of visual function such as metamorphopsia, contrast sensitivity, or other qualitative visual disturbances were not evaluated and outcomes were based purely on best recorded visual acuity (BRVA). Identifying factors at presentation in eyes with acute CSCR that may prognosticate good visual recovery would be very useful in clinical practice. In this study, we focus on visual outcomes in patients with acute, single-episode CSCR who achieved resolution of SRF without active intervention, with particular emphasis on the discordance between anatomical recovery and final visual acuity.
METHODS
Setting and approval
This multicenter, retrospective observational cohort study was conducted as a part of the Macula Society International CSCR Research Network (MICRoN) and adhered to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki. Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained from all participating centers, with a waiver of informed consent granted due to the minimal-risk and retrospective nature of the study. Data sharing agreements among collaborators and the procedures for demographic, clinical, and imaging data collection and analysis have been detailed in prior publications of the project. All images were meticulously analyzed by an experienced retina specialist (NH) and 10% of the sample images were independently reviewed and validated by another masked grader (AZ) to ensure accuracy and consistency. In case of disagreements, the measurements and segmentations were adjudicated by the senior author (JC).
Inclusion criteria, clinical information, and definitions
Of the entire dataset provided by collaborators, patients with active acute CSCR (presence of SRF) who resolved at follow-up (complete absence of fluid) following a single episode of CSCR without active intervention or medications known to treat CSCR were included. Exclusion criteria included: Patients with recurrent, persistent or chronic CSCR, patients with imaging signs of chronic or sequelae of chronic CSCR like choroidal neovascularization (CNV) confirmed on fluorescein angiography and/or OCT angiography, RPE atrophy or cystoid macular edema, and those who underwent treatment including photodynamic therapy (PDT), focal laser photocoagulation, and subthreshold laser, as well as medications including anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections, mineralocorticoid antagonists, or carbonic anhydrase inhibitor medication. Patients with other diseases affecting visual acuity (significant cataract, pathological myopia etc.) were also excluded from the study. Collected data included age at baseline, sex, systemic comorbidities, and systemic steroid use. Best-recorded Snellen visual acuity (BRVA) at baseline and follow-up was converted to logMAR (LogMAR). The duration of symptoms before presentation was measured in weeks and duration between baseline and final visit was measured in months. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on BRVA at final follow-up following resolution of SRF. Better outcome group included patients who had visual acuity equal to or better than 20/20 (could read all letters or miss no more than 2 letters on the 20/20 line) and worse outcome patients with visual acuity of 20/25 or worse. BRVA was recorded as visual acuity with current spectacles, followed by pinhole visual acuity as confirmed by all collaborators. Patients with a maximum symptom duration of up to 24 weeks prior to presentation and a minimum follow-up of at least 3 months from baseline were included in the study.
Multimodal imaging analysis
An experienced grader (NH) evaluated multimodal imaging data including autofluorescence (AF), fluorescein angiography (FA), optical coherence tomography (OCT), and OCT angiography, as available for each patient. RPE alteration area was measured in disc diameters using AF when available or other modalities, including infrared imaging (IR) or FA when AF was not available. Based on RPE changes observed in AF, IR, or FA images, CSCR was classified as either simple CSCR in which a single area of RPE alteration not exceeding 2 disc areas was present, or complex CSCR, which included RPE alteration more than 2 disc areas or multifocal RPE alterations. When FA was available, the type of leak and presence of subfoveal leak (within the central 1 mm of the fovea) were recorded. Volumetric OCT scans with clear visualization of the choroidoscleral junction were analyzed for OCT-based measurements. Central macular thickness (CMT), subfoveal choroidal thickness (SFCT), SRF height, subfoveal Haller’s layer thickness (HLT), and inner choroidal thickness (ICT) were measured according to previously explained methods in a prior publication from the group. Central retinal thickness (CRT) measured from the ILM to the outer border of photoreceptor outer segments (PROS) above the SRF. At baseline, PROS morphology was described as either uniformly elongated, irregularly elongated or speckled in appearance. Following resolution, ellipsoid zone band was classified as continuous, discontinuous or atrophic. Change in retinal thickness was measured as CMT at follow-up minus the CRT at baseline as we wanted to evaluate the retinal thickness without considering the subretinal fluid. Similarly change in SFCT was measured as difference between follow up and baseline SFCT. Inter-class coefficient was calculated between the masked graders (NH and AZ) for thickness measurements including CMT, SFCT, HLT, and lesions (SRF height, PED height) of randomly selected 10% of the OCT volumes from the cohort.
Statistical analysis
Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS statistical software version 23 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Categorical variables were expressed by frequency and percentage and continuous ones by mean (SD; SD) or median (IQR; IQR) depending on the normality of distribution as assessed by the Shapiro-Wilk test. Chi-square tests were used to analyze categorical variables among groups. Paired t-test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used to cf baseline and follow up data with and without normal distribution, respectively. Independent Student t-test and Mann Whitney test was used to cf baseline and follow up parameters between the 2 groups according to the distribution of data. Parameters that were significant on univariate logistic regression were considered for multivariate logistic regression. Baseline logMAR was multiplied by 10 to express the odds ratio per 0.1-unit change in visual acuity (equivalent to one Snellen line), improving interpretability and numerical stability. A P -value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS
In this study, we included 195 eyes of 189 patients with 108 eyes who achieved BRVA ≥ 20/20 (55.38%) at follow-up and 87 patients who developed worse visual outcome (44.62%) at final follow-up. The mean age was 45.45 ± 10.84 years and 139 were male (71.3%). Of these, 6 patients had both eyes included in the cohort. Four patients had bilateral worse vision (<20/20), whereas 2 patients had asymmetric outcomes in both eyes (20/20 in one eye and 20/25 and 20/30 in the other eye respectively). Among 195 eyes, 92.8% achieved ≥20/40 and 83.58% achieved ≥20/30 and 55.38% had 20/20 or better. ( Figure 1 ) Patients who failed to achieve 20/20 BRVA at final follow-up were significantly older (49.6 ± 11.8 vs. 42.1 ± 8.7 years; p <.001) and more frequently presented with bilateral CSCR (60.9% vs. 14.8%; p <.001) ( Table 1 ). They also had significantly worse baseline BRVA (median logMAR 0.30 vs. 0.15; p <.001). Other baseline characteristics are outlined in Table 2 . Several anatomical parameters differed between groups: patients with poorer VA outcomes demonstrated lower baseline subfoveal choroidal thickness (345.0 ± 94.7 vs. 392.5 ± 109.3 µm; P = 0.002), lower baseline central retinal thickness (193.1 ± 64.7 vs. 212.7 ± 45.9 µm; P = 0.016), and reduced inner choroidal thickness (83.0 ± 27.4 vs. 102.0 ± 44.3 µm; p <.001). ( Figure 2 ) PROS morphology also differed significantly, with uniform elongation more common in the 20/20 group. The presence of a serous PED at baseline was significantly associated with better BRVA (24.1% vs. 9.2%; P = 0.008). For the 10% of volumes that were analyzed by a masked second grader (AZ) the ICC was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.95-0.98, p <.001).
Distribution of baseline parameters across the 2 study groups. Stacked bar charts illustrate the proportional distribution of categorical grades for each parameter at baseline, expressed as percentages. Each pair of adjacent bars represents Group 1 (BRVA- ≥20/20) and Group 2 (BRVA- <20/20).
Table 1
Comparison of Baseline Demographic Parameters in Resolved CSCR Eyes With and Without Recovery of 20/20 Visual Acuity.
| Parameter | Total (n = 195) | ≥20/20 Visual Acuity (n = 108) | <20/20 Visual Acuity (n = 87) | p -value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, years | 45.45 ± 10.84 | 42.08 ± 8.66 | 49.62 ± 11.83 | <.001 |
| Sex, male (%) | 139 (71.3) | 81 (75) | 58 (66.7) | .208 |
| Bilateral CSCR (%) | 50 (25.6) | 16 (14.8) | 34 (60.9) | <.001 |
| Hypertension (%) | 52 (26.7) | 26 (24.1) | 26 (29.9) | .416 |
| Dyslipidemia (%) | 19 (9.7) | 9 (8.3) | 10 (11.5) | .477 |
| Smoking (%) | 41 (21) | 20 (18.5) | 21 (24.1) | .379 |
| Duration of symptoms, median (IQR) weeks | 3 (1.42-8.69) | 4 (1.44-8.51) | 2.5 (1.11-23.4) | .520 |
| Duration of follow up, months, median (IQR) | 16.72 (4.91-43.61) | 12.69 (3.42-27.98) | 24.21 (9.38-61.03) | <.001 |
CSCR: Central serous chorioretinopathy, IQR: Interquartile range.
Table 2
Comparison of Baseline Visual Acuity and Multimodal Imaging Parameters in Resolved CSCR Eyes With and Without Recovery of 20/20 Visual Acuity.
| Parameter | Total (n = 195) | ≥20/20 Visual Acuity (n = 108) | <20/20 Visual Acuity (n = 87) | p -value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Presence of AF (%) | 181 (92.82) | 100 (92.59) | 81 (93.1) | |
| AF RPE alteration area, median (IQR) | 1.58 ± 2.14, 1 (0.5-2) | 1.34 ± 1.42, 1 (0.5-2) | 1.86 ± 2.76, 1 (0.5-2) | .269 |
| Presence of FA (%) | 61 (31.2) | 34 (31.4) | 27 (31.03) | |
| FA leak (%) (inkblot/smoke stack/diffuse/no leak) | 46 (75.4)/3 (4.9)/1 (1.6)/11 (18.03) | 25 (73.4)/1 (2.94)/1 (2.94)/7 (20.58) | 21 (77.78)/2 (7.4)/0 (0)/4 (14.81) | .614 |
| Subfoveal leak (%) | 10 (16.3) | 6 (17.64) | 4 (14.81) | .955 |
| Complex CSCR (%) | 43 (22.1) | 18 (16.7) | 25 (28.7) | .128 |
| Baseline BRVA (logMAR), median (IQR) | 0.29 ± 0.31, 0.2 (0.09-0.4) | 0.2 ± 0.24, 0.15 (0.005-0.3) | 0.39 ± 0.35, 0.301 (0.18-0.48) | <.001 |
| Baseline CMT, microns | 393.46 ± 141.12 | 399.42 ± 134.81 | 386.07 ± 149.05 | .513 |
| Baseline SFCT, microns | 371.35 ± 105.46 | 392.46 ± 109.25 | 345.02 ± 94.74 | .002 |
| Baseline NSD, microns | 195.59 ± 130.38 | 197.69 ± 126.76 | 192.99 ± 135.45 | .618 |
| Presence of fibrin (%) | 58 (29.74) | 36 (33.33) | 22 (25.28) | .27 |
| PROS (%) (uniform/irregular/speckled) | 110 (56.4)/40 (20.5)/45 (23.1) | 73 (67.6)/21 (19.4)/ 14 (13) | 37 (42.5)/19 (21.8)/31 (35.6) | <.001 |
| Baseline CRT, microns | 203.71 ± 55.98 | 212.69 ± 45.85 | 193.08 ± 64.69 | .016 |
| Baseline HVT, microns | 277.54 ± 96.1 | 289.10 ± 98.22 | 262.94 ± 91.87 | .062 |
| Baseline ICT, microns | 93.59 ± 38.86 | 101.99 ± 44.31 | 83.01 ± 27.41 | <.001 |
| Presence of PED (%) | 34 (17.4) | 26 (24.1) | 8 (9.2) | .008 |
| Max height of PED at baseline, median (IQR) | 79.62 ± 58.81, 59.5 (34.5-112.5) | 73.92 ± 48.84, 59 (34.5-112.5) | 98.13 ± 85.26, 63 (33.75-170.5) | .919 |
| Presence of DLS (%) | 57 (29.2) | 29 (26.9) | 28 (32.2) | .433 |
| Max height of DLS at baseline, median (IQR) | 53.4 ± 104.32, 39 (28-52) | 37.97 ± 14.36, 34 (26.5-45) | 72.04 ± 153.91, 39.5 (29.25-54.75) | .253 |
Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel
Full access? Get Clinical Tree