• Türkçe
    • English
  • English 
    • Türkçe
    • English
  • Login
View Item 
  •   DSpace Home
  • Fakülteler / Faculties
  • Tıp Fakültesi / Faculty of Medicine
  • View Item
  •   DSpace Home
  • Fakülteler / Faculties
  • Tıp Fakültesi / Faculty of Medicine
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

The adverse effects of valproic acid on visual functions in the treatment of retinitis pigmentosa

Thumbnail
View/Open
IndianJOphthalmol6510984-197747_052934.pdf (766.2Kb)
Date
2017
Author
Yuce, Aslihan
Totan, Yuksel
Guler, Emre
Dervisogullari, Mehmet Serdar
Metadata
Show full item record
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of valproic acid (VPA) treatment in patients with retinitis pigmentosa (RP). Methods: A total of 48 eyes of 24 patients (13 males, 11 females) with RP prescribed VPA were included. The length of VPA treatment was 6-12 months (mean 9.4 months). Parameters evaluated were best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR]), visual field analyses (VFAs) with Humprey automated perimetry, multifocal electroretinography (ERG) with Roland-RETI scan, and VPA side effects. Results: Mean age was 34.3 +/- 10.3 years (range 18-56 years). Fifteen of the patients (30 eyes) had two ERG and VFA tracings, allowing comparison between baseline and follow-up (range 6-12 months). Mean BCVA before and after VPA therapy was 0.36 +/- 0.38 and 0.36 +/- 0.37 logMAR, respectively (P = 0.32). Quantitative perimetric indices including mean deviation and pattern standard deviation were not significantly changed after VPA therapy (P > 0.05). P1 amplitudes (in terms of nV/deg(2) and mV) of ERG waves were significantly decreased in the rings 1, 3, and 4 after VPA therapy (P < 0.05). Regarding the N1 amplitudes, the only significant decrease was observed in area 1 (P = 0.03). In addition, N1 latency was significantly increased in area 3 after VPA therapy (P = 0.04). Conclusions: VPA therapy did not have any significant benefit on BCVA and VFA. In addition, it may be associated with decline in some ERG parameters. Therefore, physicians should avoid prescribing VPA for RP until its safety and efficacy are appropriately evaluated.
URI
http://www.ijo.in/article.asp?issn=0301-4738;year=2017;volume=65;issue=10;spage=984;epage=988;aulast=Totan
http://hdl.handle.net/11727/3403
Collections
  • Tıp Fakültesi / Faculty of Medicine [1997]

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2016  DuraSpace
Contact Us | Send Feedback
Theme by 
Atmire NV
 

 

  • Politika

Politika
Kullanıcı Rehberi
Başkent Üniversitesi Kütüphanesi
Başkent Üniversitesi

Browse

All of DSpaceCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsxmlui.ArtifactBrowser.Navigation.browse_typexmlui.ArtifactBrowser.Navigation.browse_languagexmlui.ArtifactBrowser.Navigation.browse_publicationcategoryThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsxmlui.ArtifactBrowser.Navigation.browse_typexmlui.ArtifactBrowser.Navigation.browse_languagexmlui.ArtifactBrowser.Navigation.browse_publicationcategory

My Account

LoginRegister

Statistics

View Usage Statistics

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2016  DuraSpace
Contact Us | Send Feedback
Theme by 
Atmire NV