Analysis of retinal nerve fiber layer thickness in anisometropic amblyopia via optic coherence tomography.

Gözde Sahin, Derya Dal
Author Information
  1. Gözde Sahin: Ophthalmology Department, Erzurum Region Training and Research Hospital, Erzurum, Turkey. gozdejcgrl@hotmail.com. ORCID
  2. Derya Dal: Ophthalmology Department, Erzurum Region Training and Research Hospital, Erzurum, Turkey.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To detect retinal nerve fiber layer thickness differences of ambylopic and fellow eyes and ambylopic and control eyes.
METHODS: The study comprised a total of 152 eyes recruited from Erzurum Region Training and Research Hospital, Turkey, between January 2018 and May 2018. Anisometropic amblyopia was the only cause of disability (visual acuity ≤ 6/12 and a difference in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) between the two eyes of 0.20 logMAR (2 lines on an acuity chart) in amblyopic eyes (n, 74) whereas normal eyes had a best-corrected visual acuity of 6/6 and no morbidities (n, 78). Anisometropic patients were divided into three groups as hyperopic, myopic, and cylindiric. All amblyopic eyes were compared with fellow eye and control group. Retinal nerve fiber layer thickness was analyzed using optic coherence tomography (OCT) (RTVue 100-2, Optovue, Inc. Fremont, CA).
RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 28.64 ± 8.23 years in amblyopia group and 32.23 ± 8.14 years in control group (p, 0.008). Mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was 0.36 ± 0.23 in amblyopic eyes, 0.96 ± 0.15 in fellow eyes, and 1.00 ± 0 in control group. Mean refractive error was 2.76 ± 7.84 in amblyopic eyes, 0.42 ± 1.34 in fellow eyes, and 0.12 ± 0.27 in control group. Temporal retinal nerve fiber layer thickness (RNFL-T) was 77.27 ± 10.38 μ, 79.31 ± 9.53 μ, and 81.46 ± 9.86 μ respectively in ambylopic group, fellow eyes, and control eyes (p, 0.036). Superior RNFL-T was 136.23 ± 18.52 μ, 131.91 ± 13.80 μ, and 135.56 ± 14.94 μ respectively in ambylopic group, fellow eyes, and control eyes (p, 0.204). Nasal RNFL-T was 87.99 ± 13.05 μ, 82.16 ± 12.33 μ, and 85.50 ± 10.62 μ respectively in ambylopic group, fellow eyes, and control eyes (p, 0.014). Inferior RNFL-T was 144.85 ± 18.39 μ, 140.55 ± 16.92 μ, and 143.47 ± 17.75 μ respectively in ambylopic group, fellow eyes, and control eyes (p, 0.322). There was statistically significant difference in temporal and nasal quadrants and no statistical difference in superior and inferior quadrants.
DISCUSSION: The presence of amblyopia seems not to be related with RNFL-T so we could ignore anisometropic amblyopia in patients with disease that could be detected and followed via RNFL thickness. Further and larger scaled studies are needed for certain results.

Keywords

References

  1. Int J Ophthalmol. 2013;6(1):90-4 [PMID: 23550060]
  2. J Neurol. 2018 Jul;265(7):1557-1562 [PMID: 29713825]
  3. J AAPOS. 2011 Aug;15(4):338-41 [PMID: 21907114]
  4. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1992 Aug;33(9):2729-32 [PMID: 1639619]
  5. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2015 Sep-Oct;25(5):437-42 [PMID: 25837640]
  6. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2018 Nov;56:41-46 [PMID: 29937099]
  7. BMJ Open Ophthalmol. 2018 Jan 18;3(1):e000081 [PMID: 29657975]
  8. BMC Ophthalmol. 2017 Sep 15;17(1):167 [PMID: 28915835]
  9. Clin Ophthalmol. 2014 Apr 12;8:749-53 [PMID: 24748770]
  10. J AAPOS. 2012 Oct;16(5):428-30 [PMID: 23084378]
  11. J Neuroimmunol. 2018 Dec 15;325:69-73 [PMID: 30290966]
  12. Eur J Neurosci. 2009 Mar;29(5):1064-70 [PMID: 19291231]
  13. PLoS One. 2014 Feb 06;9(2):e88363 [PMID: 24516641]
  14. Curr Eye Res. 2013 Jul;38(7):802-9 [PMID: 23521720]
  15. Korean J Ophthalmol. 2010 Aug;24(4):207-12 [PMID: 20714383]
  16. Alzheimers Res Ther. 2017 Mar 1;9(1):13 [PMID: 28253913]
  17. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011 Feb 01;52(1):625-34 [PMID: 20861480]
  18. J AAPOS. 2009 Apr;13(2):148-50 [PMID: 19157939]
  19. Clin Exp Optom. 2013 May;96(3):267-71 [PMID: 23421941]
  20. J Neurophysiol. 1963 Nov;26:978-93 [PMID: 14084170]
  21. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010 Mar;51(3):1432-8 [PMID: 19875650]
  22. Br J Ophthalmol. 2011 Dec;95(12):1696-9 [PMID: 21398410]
  23. Psychiatry Res. 2019 Jan;271:226-229 [PMID: 30502559]
  24. Clin Respir J. 2018 Jan;12(1):247-252 [PMID: 27401776]
  25. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2013 Jul-Aug;50(4):218-21 [PMID: 23521028]
  26. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2018 Apr 1;59(5):2104-2109 [PMID: 29677374]
  27. Ophthalmology. 2006 Sep;113(9):1583-92 [PMID: 16949443]
  28. Vision Res. 2006 Feb;46(4):506-26 [PMID: 16321418]
  29. Am J Ophthalmol. 2009 Jul;148(1):143-7 [PMID: 19327749]
  30. Arch Ophthalmol. 2009 Jan;127(1):50-8 [PMID: 19139338]
  31. Ophthalmologica. 2003 Sep-Oct;217(5):365-9 [PMID: 12913328]
  32. Ocul Immunol Inflamm. 2019;27(5):798-804 [PMID: 29847216]
  33. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1980 Sep;19(9):1105-9 [PMID: 7410001]
  34. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2016 Aug 4;26(5):436-41 [PMID: 26951532]
  35. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003 Aug;44(8):3369-73 [PMID: 12882783]
  36. J Ophthalmol. 2015;2015:946467 [PMID: 26064676]
  37. Saudi J Ophthalmol. 2011 Oct;25(4):405-9 [PMID: 23960955]
  38. Ophthalmology. 2008 Dec;115(12):2259-61 [PMID: 18801577]
  39. Ocul Immunol Inflamm. 2007 Jul-Aug;15(4):319-23 [PMID: 17763130]
  40. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1983 Jun;24(6):788-90 [PMID: 6853107]
  41. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2013 Dec;251(12):2811-9 [PMID: 24146271]
  42. Cutan Ocul Toxicol. 2019 Jun;38(2):131-135 [PMID: 30360658]
  43. Clin Ophthalmol. 2010 Sep 20;4:1061-4 [PMID: 20922043]
  44. J AAPOS. 2013 Feb;17(1):115-6 [PMID: 23273939]
  45. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2018 Aug 24;7(4):16 [PMID: 30159209]
  46. Can J Ophthalmol. 2011 Oct;46(5):425-7 [PMID: 21995986]
  47. Ophthalmology. 2019 Mar;126(3):445-453 [PMID: 30060979]
  48. Int J Ophthalmol. 2013;6(1):85-9 [PMID: 23550031]
  49. Pituitary. 2018 Oct;21(5):515-523 [PMID: 30097827]
  50. Ophthalmology. 2013 Feb;120(2):395-403 [PMID: 23031668]
  51. Br J Ophthalmol. 2013 Mar;97(3):318-22 [PMID: 23235943]
  52. PLoS One. 2018 Nov 29;13(11):e0208145 [PMID: 30496251]
  53. Ophthalmology. 2009 Sep;116(9):1604-9 [PMID: 19560205]
  54. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2017 May 11;27(3):281-284 [PMID: 27445077]
  55. J Affect Disord. 2016 Nov 01;204:159-65 [PMID: 27344626]
  56. Optom Vis Sci. 2018 Mar;95(3):247-255 [PMID: 29420438]
  57. Surv Ophthalmol. 2005 Mar-Apr;50(2):123-66 [PMID: 15749306]
  58. Eye (Lond). 2019 Apr;33(4):549-556 [PMID: 30382239]
  59. Br J Ophthalmol. 1997 May;81(5):350-4 [PMID: 9227197]
  60. BMC Ophthalmol. 2018 Mar 2;18(1):66 [PMID: 29499674]

MeSH Term

Adolescent
Adult
Amblyopia
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Nerve Fibers
Optic Disk
Prospective Studies
Retinal Ganglion Cells
Tomography, Optical Coherence
Visual Acuity
Young Adult

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0eyes0controlgroupfellowambylopicnervefiberlayerthicknessamblyopiaacuitypRNFL-Tvisualamblyopicrespectivelyretinaldifferencebest-correctedpatientscoherencetomography2018AnisometropicBCVA2nRetinalopticMeanquadrantsanisometropicviaOBJECTIVE:detectdifferencesMETHODS:studycomprisedtotal152recruitedErzurumRegionTrainingResearchHospitalTurkeyJanuaryMaycausedisability≤ 6/12two20logMARlineschart74whereasnormal6/6morbidities78dividedthreegroupshyperopicmyopiccylindiriccomparedeyeanalyzedusingOCTRTVue100-2OptovueIncFremontCARESULTS:meanage2864 ± 823 years3223 ± 814 years00836 ± 02396 ± 015100 ± 0refractiveerror76 ± 78442 ± 13412 ± 027Temporal7727 ± 1038 μ7931 ± 953 μ8146 ± 986 μ036Superior13623 ± 1852 μ13191 ± 1380 μ13556 ± 1494 μ204Nasal8799 ± 1305 μ8216 ± 1233 μ8550 ± 1062 μ014Inferior14485 ± 1839 μ14055 ± 1692 μ14347 ± 1775 μ322statisticallysignificanttemporalnasalstatisticalsuperiorinferiorDISCUSSION:presenceseemsrelatedignorediseasedetectedfollowedRNFLlargerscaledstudiesneededcertainresultsAnalysisAmblyopiaOptic

Similar Articles

Cited By