—To determine possible distinct phenotypic subtypes of cone-rod dystrophy.
—Thirty-three patients with cone-rod dystrophy (from 25 families) were assessed prospectively on electroretinography, visual field testing, psychophysical threshold profiles, and fundus features. The clinical records of an additional 150 patients with cone-rod dystrophy were examined retrospectively in terms of the classification schema derived from the prospective study.
—Based on electroretinographic recordings, two major types of cone-rod dystrophy were differentiated. In type 1, cone amplitudes were reduced to a greater degree than were rod amplitudes on electroretinography, while in type 2, cone and rod electroretinographic amplitudes were reduced in equal proportion. These two types were further subdivided on the basis of patterns of visual field loss and threshold elevation. In type 1a, there was a central or paracentral scotoma, and cone thresholds were more elevated centrally than peripherally. In type 1b, there was no central scotoma, and cone thresholds were more elevated peripherally than centrally. In type 2a, there was a central scotoma, cone thresholds were more elevated centrally than peripherally, and rod thresholds were more elevated peripherally than centrally. In type 2b, a partial or complete ring scotoma was present, cone thresholds were more elevated peripherally than centrally, and rod thresholds were more elevated in the midperipheral than in either the central or far peripheral region of the retina. Of the 150 additional patients with cone-rod dystrophy, data sufficient for classification were available for 95 patients, and all but two had findings that were consistent with classification into one of these four subtypes.
—Our results identify four functionally distinct subtypes of cone-rod dystrophy that may be useful for patient counseling and future molecular genetic studies.
Szlyk JP, Fishman GA, Alexander KR, Peachey NS, Derlacki DJ. Clinical Subtypes of Cone-Rod Dystrophy. Arch Ophthalmol. 1993;111(6):781-788. doi:10.1001/archopht.1993.01090060069025