The focal adhesion kinase (FAK) is a non-receptor tyrosine kinase abundantly expressed in the mammalian brain and highly enriched in neuronal growth cones. Inhibitory and facilitatory activities of FAK on neuronal growth have been reported and its role in neuritic outgrowth remains controversial. Unlike other tyrosine kinases, such as the neurotrophin receptors regulating neuronal growth and plasticity, the relevance of FAK for learning and memory in vivo has not been clearly defined yet. A comprehensive study aimed at determining the role of FAK in neuronal growth, neurotransmitter release and synaptic plasticity in hippocampal neurons and in hippocampus-dependent learning and memory was therefore undertaken using the mouse model. Gain- and loss-of-function experiments indicated that FAK is a critical regulator of hippocampal cell morphology. FAK mediated neurotrophin-induced neuritic outgrowth and FAK inhibition affected both miniature excitatory postsynaptic potentials and activity-dependent hippocampal long-term potentiation prompting us to explore the possible role of FAK in spatial learning and memory in vivo. Our data indicate that FAK has a growth-promoting effect, is importantly involved in the regulation of the synaptic function and mediates in vivo hippocampus-dependent spatial learning and memory.

The aim of this paper is to summarise our own and to review published experience regarding the long-term outcome of intravitreal treatment for macular neovascularisation (MNV) secondary to Sorsby’s fundus dystrophy (SFD). A systematic literature search using the MeSH terms [Sorsby] and [anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)] was conducted in NCBI/PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), ScienceDirect, Google Scholar and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify publications reporting anti-VEGF treatment outcomes in SFD. Treatment outcomes were extracted for this meta-analysis from 14 publications and an own patient reporting a total of 31 cases with a mean follow-up (FU) of 54 months. Both eyes were affected in ten (32.3%) instances. Heterogenous reporting limited the comparability of the outcomes. All papers in common, however, reported satisfied to excellent responses to anti-VEGF therapy if patients were diagnosed and treated immediately after onset of symptoms. Of 20 eyes, for which visual acuity was reported before and after treatment, five worsened and seven improved by more than 1 line, whereas eight eyes maintained their function by end of the follow up, and 11 eyes (55%) maintained a driving vision (Snellen VA ≥ 0.5). Of six eyes with a VA < 0.5, VA improved in one to VA ≥ 0.5, whereas of 14 eyes with an initial VA ≥ 0.5, this dropped to <0.5 despite therapy. In MNV secondary to SFD, the delay between first symptoms and access to anti-VEGF treatment determines subretinal scar formation and thereby, functional prognosis. If treated early, this is generally favourable under regular controls and a consequent anti-VEGF treatment of MNV activity.

Purpose To compare 4 optical coherence tomography-angiography (OCT-A) devices for foveal avascular zone (FAZ) measurements in healthy subjects. Methods The central retinas of 24 eyes of 12 healthy subjects were scanned with 4 different OCT-A devices (Optovue RTVue-XR, Zeiss Cirrus 5000-HD-OCT, a prototype Spectralis OCT2, Heidelberg Engineering, and Topcon DRI-OCT Triton Swept-source OCT). For the Topcon, Zeiss, and Optovue devices, 3-mm and 6-mm scans were performed. The Heidelberg device only provided 4-mm scans. En-face OCT-A images of the superficial and deep capillary plexus of the macular area were generated. The FAZ areas were measured and compared. Results Twenty-four healthy eyes were included. OCT-A devices showed significant differences in FAZ measurements. The Zeiss OCT-A device measured the smallest values for foveal avascular area (mean 218.7 mm2), followed by the Optovue device (229.6 mm2), the Topcon device (239.3 mm2), and the Heidelberg device (250.4 mm2). Differences were statistically significant for following devices: Heidelberg versus Optovue (p < 0.001), Heidelberg versus Zeiss (p < 0.001), Topcon versus Zeiss (p < 0.001), and Optovue versus Zeiss (p = 0.046). For the Optovue device, FAZ measurements were significantly different between 3 mm (mean 220 mm2) and 6 mm (mean 239.3 mm2, p = 0.007) scans. All other devices showed no significant difference within scan modes. Conclusion Current OCT-A devices provide images that allow such measurements, but values showed significant differences between devices and, for the Optovue instrument, even within scan modes. The data for OCTA measurements cannot be transferred interchangeably between the devices. Therefore, a patient should always be measured with the same device.

No abstract