A small disc size, a big challenge: effect of optic disc size on the correlation between peripapillary choroidal thickness, peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer, and ganglion cell layer.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 OPHTHALMOLOGY International Ophthalmology Pub Date : 2024-11-06 DOI:10.1007/s10792-024-03330-3
Yasemin Un, Oksan Alpogan, Ruveyde Bolac
{"title":"A small disc size, a big challenge: effect of optic disc size on the correlation between peripapillary choroidal thickness, peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer, and ganglion cell layer.","authors":"Yasemin Un, Oksan Alpogan, Ruveyde Bolac","doi":"10.1007/s10792-024-03330-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We aimed to analyze the effect of optic disc size on the correlation between the peripapillary choroid (PPC), peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL), and macular ganglion cell inner plexiform layer (MGCIPL) thicknesses in subjects with ocular hypertension (OHT) and primary open angle glaucoma (POAG).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study included 61 eyes with a disc area (DA) of ≤ 1.63 mm<sup>2</sup>, 92 eyes with a DA of 1.63-2.42 mm<sup>2</sup>, and 59 eyes with a DA of ≥ 2.42 mm<sup>2</sup> in small disc, regular disc, and large disc groups, respectively. The swept-source optical coherence tomography scans of the PPC, RNFL, and MGCIPL were analyzed according to disc size.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The three groups did not significantly differ in RNFL or MGCIPL measurements, but the PPC measurement was statistically significantly higher in the small disc group and statistically significantly thinner in the large disc group. Most of the correlations observed between the RNFL and MGCIPL measurements and eye characteristics in the regular disc group were not detected in the small and large disc groups. While the RNFL and MGCIPL were well correlated in all disc size groups, the PPC did not correlate with the RNFL or MGCIPL in any of the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, the RNFL and MGCIPL measurements were consistent across all three disc sizes. While the PPC was thicker in small discs than in larger discs, it was not correlated with the RNFL or MGCIPL.</p>","PeriodicalId":14473,"journal":{"name":"International Ophthalmology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-024-03330-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: We aimed to analyze the effect of optic disc size on the correlation between the peripapillary choroid (PPC), peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL), and macular ganglion cell inner plexiform layer (MGCIPL) thicknesses in subjects with ocular hypertension (OHT) and primary open angle glaucoma (POAG).

Methods: This study included 61 eyes with a disc area (DA) of ≤ 1.63 mm2, 92 eyes with a DA of 1.63-2.42 mm2, and 59 eyes with a DA of ≥ 2.42 mm2 in small disc, regular disc, and large disc groups, respectively. The swept-source optical coherence tomography scans of the PPC, RNFL, and MGCIPL were analyzed according to disc size.

Results: The three groups did not significantly differ in RNFL or MGCIPL measurements, but the PPC measurement was statistically significantly higher in the small disc group and statistically significantly thinner in the large disc group. Most of the correlations observed between the RNFL and MGCIPL measurements and eye characteristics in the regular disc group were not detected in the small and large disc groups. While the RNFL and MGCIPL were well correlated in all disc size groups, the PPC did not correlate with the RNFL or MGCIPL in any of the groups.

Conclusions: Overall, the RNFL and MGCIPL measurements were consistent across all three disc sizes. While the PPC was thicker in small discs than in larger discs, it was not correlated with the RNFL or MGCIPL.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
小视盘,大挑战:视盘大小对毛细血管周围脉络膜厚度、毛细血管周围视网膜神经纤维层和神经节细胞层之间相关性的影响。
目的:我们旨在分析视盘大小对眼压过高(OHT)和原发性开角型青光眼(POAG)受试者毛细血管周围脉络膜(PPC)、毛细血管周围视网膜神经纤维层(RNFL)和黄斑神经节细胞丛状内层(MGCIPL)厚度之间相关性的影响:这项研究包括61只眼球,分别为小圆盘组、普通圆盘组和大圆盘组,圆盘面积(DA)≤1.63 mm2的有61只眼,圆盘面积(DA)为1.63-2.42 mm2的有92只眼,圆盘面积(DA)≥2.42 mm2的有59只眼。根据视盘大小对PPC、RNFL和MGCIPL的扫源光学相干断层扫描进行分析:结果:三组的 RNFL 和 MGCIPL 测量值没有明显差异,但小椎间盘组的 PPC 测量值在统计学上明显更高,而大椎间盘组的 PPC 测量值在统计学上明显更薄。在普通视盘组中观察到的 RNFL 和 MGCIPL 测量值与眼睛特征之间的大多数相关性在小视盘组和大视盘组中都没有发现。在所有视盘尺寸组中,RNFL 和 MGCIPL 都有很好的相关性,但在任何一组中,PPC 都与 RNFL 或 MGCIPL 无关:总的来说,RNFL和MGCIPL的测量结果在所有三种尺寸的椎间盘中都是一致的。结论:总体而言,三种尺寸的椎间盘的 RNFL 和 MGCIPL 测量值是一致的,虽然小椎间盘的 PPC 比大椎间盘厚,但与 RNFL 或 MGCIPL 无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
451
期刊介绍: International Ophthalmology provides the clinician with articles on all the relevant subspecialties of ophthalmology, with a broad international scope. The emphasis is on presentation of the latest clinical research in the field. In addition, the journal includes regular sections devoted to new developments in technologies, products, and techniques.
期刊最新文献
Retinal vasculature changes in patients with internal carotid artery stenosis. Performance of Chatgpt in ophthalmology exam; human versus AI. Unveiling macular displacement: endotamponade variations in retinal detachment repair outcomes. A small disc size, a big challenge: effect of optic disc size on the correlation between peripapillary choroidal thickness, peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer, and ganglion cell layer. Clinical profile and etiological spectrum of patients presenting with corneal hydrops over a 12-year period.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1