4.7 Article

Corneal Epithelium Thickness Profile in 614 Normal Chinese Children Aged 7-15 Years Old

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 6, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/srep23482

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Three-year Action Program of Shanghai Municipality for Strengthening the Construction of the Public Health System [2011-15]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81402695]
  3. Cutting-Edge Technology Combined PR Project of Shanghai Shen Kang Hospital Development Centre [SHDC12014114]
  4. Shanghai Natural Science Foundation [15ZR1438400]
  5. Shanghai Municipal Health Bureau [20134263]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of the study is to describe the values and distribution of corneal epithelium thickness (CET) in normal Chinese school-aged children, and to explore associated factors with CET. CET maps were measured by Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography (FD-OCT) in normal Chinese children aged 7 to 15 years old from two randomly selected schools in Shanghai, China. Children with normal intraocular pressure were further examined for cycloplegic autorefraction, corneal curvature radius (CCR) and axial length. Central (2-mm diameter area), para-central (2- to 5-mm diameter area), and peripheral (5- to 6-mm diameter area) CET in the superior, superotemporal, temporal, inferotemporal, inferior, inferonasal, nasal, superonasal cornea; minimum, maximum, range, and standard deviation of CET within the 5-mm diameter area were recorded. The CET was thinner in the superior than in the inferior and was thinner in the temporal than in the nasal. The maximum CET was located in the inferior zone, and the minimum CET was in the superior zone. A thicker central CET was associated with male gender (p = 0.009) and older age (p = 0.037) but not with CCR (p = 0.061), axial length (p = 0.253), or refraction (p = 0.351) in the multiple regression analyses. CCR, age, and gender were correlated with para-central and peripheral CET.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available