Related Experiment Videos
Timing of initial screening examinations for retinopathy of prematurity
A K Hutchinson1, R A Saunders, J W O'Neil
1N. Edgar Miles Center for Pediatric Ophthalmology, Department of Ophthalmology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, USA.
Insights
A new screening protocol using both chronological and postconceptional age (in weeks) can precisely determine when to begin retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) eye exams, improving detection and reducing unnecessary early screenings.
Area of Science:
- Ophthalmology
- Neonatology
- Pediatric Medicine
Background:
- Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is a leading cause of blindness in premature infants.
- Current screening protocols often rely on single parameters, leading to potential delays or unnecessary examinations.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate a novel screening protocol for ROP using dual criteria: postconceptional age and chronological age.
- To determine the optimal timing for initiating ROP eye examinations to improve diagnostic accuracy and efficiency.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective review of medical records for 179 infants (326 eyes) treated for threshold ROP.
- Analysis of chronological and postconceptional ages at the time of laser treatment.
- Evaluation of various screening parameters to identify optimal dual criteria.
Main Results:
- Screening at 7 weeks chronological age or 34 weeks postconceptional age (whichever is earlier), but not before 5 weeks chronological age, reliably detects threshold ROP.
- This dual-criteria approach reduces the number of premature infants undergoing unnecessary early eye examinations.
Conclusions:
- Simultaneously applying dual criteria of chronological and postconceptional age is a superior method for initiating ROP examinations.
- This approach is preferable to using either chronological or postconceptional age alone for ROP screening.
Objective:
To test a screening protocol for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) that uses the dual criteria of postconceptional age and chronological age, rather than a single parameter, to determine precisely when to begin eye examinations.
Methods:
We retrospectively reviewed medical records of 179 infants (326 eyes) who had undergone laser treatment for threshold ROP. We entered their chronological and postconceptional ages at treatment into a database and evaluated various screening parameters to determine the combination of criteria that would allow us to safely postpone the initial eye examinations.
Results:
Screening infants at 7 weeks of chronological age or 34 weeks of postconceptional age (whichever comes first), but not before 5 weeks of chronological age, seems to reliably detect the onset of threshold ROP while reducing the number of unnecessary early examinations.
Conclusion:
Simultaneously applied dual criteria of chronological age and postconceptional age may be a superior method of determining when to initiate ROP examinations and is preferable to using either chronological age or postconceptional age alone.