Population-based study assesses epiretinal membrane prevalence in participants, suggesting key associations with vitreous detachment and visual acuity.
Purpose To assess prevalence and associations of epiretinal membranes (ERMs) in a general population. Methods In participants of the population-based Beijing Eye Study, we assessed macular volume optical coherence tomographic (OCT) scans for ERMs. Results The study included 1351 eyes (914 participants) (age: 64.7±9.8 years; range: 50–91 years). ERMs were detected in 80 eyes (5.9%; 95% CI 4.9% to 6.9%) of 60 participants (6.6%; 95% CI 5.1% to 8.1%), with ERMs without retinal surface wrinkling in 34 (2.5%) eyes, ERMs with retinal surface wrinkling and normal fovea contour in 16 (1.2%) eyes, ERMs with reduced foveal depth in 20 (1.5%) eyes, ERMs with complete foveal flattening in 6 (0.4%) eyes and ERMs with foveal elevation in 4 (0.2%) eyes. Hyper-reflective epiretinal dots (HEDs) were detected in 114 (8.4%) eyes. Higher ERM prevalence was associated (multivariable analysis) with higher stage of posterior vitreous detachment (PVD) (OR: 1.81; 95% CI 1.34 to 2.45; p<0.001), older age (OR: 1.05; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.09; p=0.002), higher prevalence of HEDs (OR: 9.18; 95% CI 4.85 to 17.4; p<0.001) and worse best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) (OR: 2.75; 95% CI 1.04 to 7.30; p=0.04), but not with axial length (p=0.69) or pseudophakia (p=0.98). Out of 746 eyes without PVD, 3 (0.4%) eyes had ERMs (without retinal surface wrinkling) and 9 (1.2%) eyes showed HEDs. Higher ERM stage increased with higher PVD stage (beta: 0.32; p<0.001), older age (beta: 0.11; p=0.006) and worse BCVA (beta: 0.07; p=0.04), but not with axial length (p=0.75) or pseudophakia (p=0.71). Conclusions As measured by OCT, ERM prevalence was mainly associated with PVD and to a minor degree with older age and worse BCVA, while longer axial length, pseudophakia or ocular diseases such as age-related macular disease and glaucoma were not related to prevalence and stage of ERMs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jonas et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: