usmle123
Forum Senior
Topics: 20
Posts: 43
|
I'm so confused about retinal artery ooclusion and amaurosis fugax, what's the difference between them by definition? "amaurosis fugax is caused by retinal emboli from carotid disease", so does this emboli occlude the retinal artery? if it does, why not call it retinal artery occlusion? can anyone help me? thanks
|
| frank100
Forum Guru
Topics: 48
Posts: 586
|
amaurosis fugax´s definition is a time issue: if there is a temporal oclusion of the retinal artery that resolved spontaneously, this is described as amaurosis fugax. the point with it is that it mat be a sign of impending stroke...
retunal artery oclusion: is an emergency, you have to do something because here the patien is not complaining of transient blindness, he or she is complaining of sudden visual loss right now!!!
so conclusion: it is amaurosis ugax when the patint tells you that he has had transient episodes of blindness...
it is retinal artery oclusion when the patient tells you that he or she is unilaterally blind (normally), and hasn´t recovered.
both are 70% of the time related to carotid artery embolism, in both cases you do something, but AF (is a warning) and RAO (is an emergency).
|
| juanma0
Forum Senior
Topics: 10
Posts: 146
|
great analysis frank.
|
| usmle123
Forum Senior
Topics: 20
Posts: 43
|
frank100, thank you so much for your help
|
| luabe
Forum Junior
Topics: 11
Posts: 23
|
also CRAO has clues like cherry red fovea and pallor of optic disc
while Amaurosis Fugax describes something about edematous retinal arterioles
I agree though, it's pretty confusing in a vignette
|
| cbenitesch
Forum Senior
Topics: 10
Posts: 141
|
Yeah, frank! good one!... we have just remember the term "fugax" it comes from the greek and the meaning is fugitive... so it comes for a while and then it goes!...
|
|
| |
| | | | | | |
