4.4 Article

Macular vessel density in diabetes and diabetic retinopathy with swept-source optical coherence tomography angiography

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00417-020-04832-3

关键词

Vessel density; Diabetic retinopathy; OCTA; Swept-source

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose Previous studies on the association between macular vessel density (VD) and diabetic retinopathy had conflicting conclusions. This study assessed the alterations of macular VD, as well as other factors, in diabetic patients using swept-source optical coherence tomography angiography (SS-OCTA) in a large-scale sample from Chinese communities. Methods Patients with type 2 diabetes without history of ocular treatment were recruited from 2017 to 2018. The average and quadrant parafoveal vessel density (PVD) were obtained with a commercial SS-OCTA device (Triton, Topcon, Japan). The univariate and multivariate linear regression was used to analyse the correlation of PVD with diabetic retinopathy (DR), diabetic macular edema (DME), HbA1c, and other factors. Results A total of 919 patients were included in the final statistical analysis. After adjusting for other confounding factors, the DR patients had significantly lower average PVD (beta = - 1.062, 95% CI = - 1.424 to - 0.699,P< 0.001) in comparison with those without DR. In addition, the patients with mild DR or vision-threatening diabetic retinopathy (VTDR) also had significantly lower PVD (P< 0.001 for mild DR, andP= 0.008 for VTDR) compared with those without DR. Age and HbA1c were also significantly related to PVD measurements, as shown by multivariable linear regression. Participants with DME had a significantly lower average PVD and temporal PVD than those without DME (P< 0.05). Conclusions Reduced PVD was independently associated with more severe DR, older age, higher HbA1c level, and the presence of DME. These findings suggested that macular vessel alterations in DR warrant further evaluation in the longitudinal studies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据