4.2 Article

Macular pigment density changes in Japanese individuals supplemented with lutein or zeaxanthin: quantification via resonance Raman spectrophotometry and autofluorescence imaging

Journal

JAPANESE JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
Volume 56, Issue 5, Pages 488-496

Publisher

SPRINGER JAPAN KK
DOI: 10.1007/s10384-012-0157-0

Keywords

Autofluorescence imaging; Lutein; Macular pigment optical density (MPOD); Resonance Raman spectrophotometry; Zeaxanthin

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Our purpose was to determine whether either lutein or zeaxanthin supplementation affects macular pigment concentration/optical density (MPOD) in healthy Japanese individuals. Twenty-two healthy volunteers were randomized to either 10 mg of orally administered lutein or zeaxanthin daily for up to 3 months. MPOD levels were measured by resonance Raman spectrophotometry (RRS) and one-wavelength autofluorescence imaging (AFI) at baseline and 1, 2, and 3 months after the start of supplementation. MPOD levels measured with each method were correlated significantly at all time points. MPODRRS and MPODAFI levels increased > 20 % from baseline at 2 and 3 months after lutein supplementation. By multiple regression analyses, the refractive error was correlated positively with MPODRRS levels at baseline, whereas age and sex were not significant. In the lutein group, MPODRRS levels significantly increased from baseline at all time points in individuals without high myopia exceeding -4 diopters, whereas the increase was not observed in individuals with high myopia. In the zeaxanthin group, MPODRRS levels remained unchanged in those with and without high myopia. MPODRRS and MPODAFI levels correlated significantly with each other. In normal healthy Japanese individuals without high myopia, lutein supplementation increased MPOD levels within the fovea more effectively than did zeaxanthin.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available