Table 2.
Treatments administered during lockdown and visual outcomes.
| Total number of eyes | 513 | |
| Previous treatment (%) | ||
| Anti-VEGF | 465 (90.6%) | |
| Anti-VEGF + PDT | 37 (7.2%) | |
| None | 11 (2.1%) | |
| Treatment (n eyes receiving treatment/total eyes at visit, %) | ||
| Visit | Anti-VEGF | None |
| 1 | 446/476 (93.7%) | 30/476 (6.3%) |
| 2 | 366/383 (95.6%)a | 17/383 (4.4%) |
| 3 | 65/72 (90.3%) | 7/72 (9.7%) |
| 4 | 3/4 (75.0%) | 1/4 (25.0%) |
| Post-lockdown | 430/485 (88.7%) | 55/485 (11.3%) |
| Mean initial CVA (±SD) for all eyes (n = 511) | 62.9 (±15.4) letters | |
| Mean initial CVA (±SD) for eyes with complete data (n = 371)b | 63.9 (±14.8) letters | |
| Mean final CVA (±SD) (n = 371 eyes)b | 61.8 (±15.2) letters | |
| Mean change in CVA (±SD) (n = 371 eyes)b | −2.3 (±8.3) letters | |
| n eyes (%) with stable or improved CVA | 151/371 (40.7%) | |
| n eyes (%) with visual loss of less than 5 letters | 89/371 (24.0%) | |
| n eyes (%) with visual loss of at least 5 letters | 131/371 (35.3%) | |
| n eyes (%) with visual loss of at least 15 letters | 23/371 (6.2%) | |
| Subjective impression of visual function at first post-lockdown visit (n = 100 eyes)b | Number of eyes (%) | |
| Better | 4/100 (4.0%) | |
| Worse | 2/100 (2.0%) | |
| Stable | 94/100 (94.0%) | |
PDT photodynamic therapy, n number, CVA corrected visual acuity, SD standard deviation.
aOne eye underwent additional PDT.
bFormal CVA assessment was performed in n = 371 eyes, while for n = 100 eyes only subjective impression of visual change was documented. No CVA or subjective visual impression was noted for n = 14 eyes.