4.6 Article

Relationship between the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio and the optical coherence tomographic features of chorioretina in patients with preeclampsia

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 16, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0261287

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea [NRF-2019R1G1A1011559]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study evaluated the correlation between ophthalmologic factors and the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio in preeclampsia patients using OCT and OCT-A. The high sFlt-1/PlGF ratio group had lower choroidal thickness, and a significant negative association was found between sFlt-1 and central subfield CT.
This study aimed to evaluate the correlation between ophthalmologic factors and the serologic indicator soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase 1 (sFlt-1): placental growth factor (PlGF) ratio in patients with preeclampsia using optical coherence tomography (OCT) and OCT angiography (OCT-A). A total of 52 pregnant patients (104 eyes) diagnosed with preeclampsia were recruited during their hospital stay. The associations between the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio and chorioretinal measurements, including the choroidal thickness (CT), foveal avascular zone, vascular density, and ganglion cell layer+ were evaluated. Central and nasal subfield CT of the left eye (p = 0.039; p = 0.010) and nasal subfield CT of the right eye (p = 0.042) were lower in the high sFlt-1/PlGF ratio group (>= 38). Pearson's correlation test showed a negative correlation between the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio and central subfield CT; however, this was not statistically significant (p = 0.648). Linear regression analysis revealed a significant association between the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio and central subfield CT (beta coefficient, -6.66; p = 0.01) and between sFlt-1 and central subfield CT (beta coefficient, -5.65; p = 0.00). Thus, an increase in the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio resulted in a decrease in central subfield CT.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available