4.1 Article

Repeatability of Spectral Domain Optical Coherence Tomography Measurements in High Myopia

期刊

JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA
卷 25, 期 5, 页码 E526-E530

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000385

关键词

high myopia; axial length; spectral domain optical coherence tomography; repeatability

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the repeatability of spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SDOCT) parameters in high-myopic and emmetropic healthy subjects, and to evaluate the influence of axial length on the repeatability of SDOCT parameters in high myopia. Methods: In a prospective study, 93 eyes of 63 high-myopic subjects (spherical refractive error, -6 to -12 D; median age, 25 y) and 28 eyes of 14 emmetropic (spherical refractive error, 0D; median age, 30 y) subjects underwent optic nerve head, retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL), and ganglion cell complex imaging with SDOCT. For the repeatability analysis, 31 eyes of 31 high-myopic subjects and 14 eyes of 14 emmetropic subjects underwent 3 repeated scans in the same session. Results: Among the optic nerve head parameters, within-subject coefficient of variation (CVw) measurements of the disc area (0.6% vs. 0.2%), rim area (8.7 vs. 2.8), and rim volume (16.7 vs. 8.9) were significantly larger (worse) in high-myopic compared with the emmetropic subjects. CVw measurements of all RNFL (range, 1.7 to 22.4) and ganglion cell complex (range, 1.8 to 2.5) parameters in high-myopic subjects were comparable to that in emmetropic subjects (2.4 to 24.0 and 1.7 to 2.0, respectively). Axial length significantly affected the CVw of nasal (coefficient, 0.01; P = 0.04) and average RNFL (coefficient, 0.004; P = 0.001) parameters but not that of the other SDOCT parameters. Conclusions: Repeatabilities of most of the SDOCT parameters in high-myopic subjects were good and comparable to that of emmetropic subjects. This suggests that SDOCT can be useful for following up high-myopic glaucoma patients to detect progression.

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

4.1
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