4.4 Article

Enhanced depth imaging-optical coherence tomography of the choroid in moderate and severe primary angle-closure glaucoma

期刊

ACTA OPHTHALMOLOGICA
卷 93, 期 5, 页码 E349-E355

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/aos.12616

关键词

choroidal thickness; enhanced depth imaging-optical coherence tomography; primary angle-closure glaucoma

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81371008]
  2. Science and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong Province, China [2012B031800353]
  3. Xiangnan University, China [2013YJ67]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PurposeTo compare the choroidal thickness (CT) in eyes with moderate and severe primary angle-closure glaucoma (PACG) with the eyes of healthy controls. MethodsFifty-nine patients (59 eyes) with PACG and 56 age-matched normal subjects underwent macular CT scanning using enhanced depth imaging-optical coherence tomography. The subjects with PACG were further classified as having moderate [-12dBvisual field mean deviation (VF-MD)-6dB] or severe (VF-MD<-12dB) glaucoma. The average CT of the PACG eyes at each location was compared to that of normal eyes. ResultsThe CT was significantly increased in moderate and severe PACG eyes compared with the normal eyes at all nine macular locations, with the exception of 1 and 3mm superior to the fovea. The mean CT under the fovea was 292.048.2m in the moderate PACG eyes, 277.1 +/- 58.3m in the severe PACG eyes and 249.9 +/- 72.1m in the normal eyes, respectively. There were no significant differences between the macular CTs in the eyes with moderate PACG and those in severe PACG eyes (all p>0.05). Factors associated with a thinner choroid were ageing (p<0.001), female (p=0.036) and increasing axial length (p=0.021). Neither the VF-MD nor pattern standard deviation was found to be associated with CT. ConclusionsThe CT is greater in patients with PACG, but it does not differ between moderate and severe PACG, suggesting a lack of relationship between CT and the progression of glaucoma based on EDI-OCT measurements.

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