Effect of Refractive Status on Peripapillary Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness and Vascular Density: A Prospective Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography-Based Study.

Q2 Medicine
Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran Pub Date : 2025-02-05 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.47176/mjiri.39.21
Arezoo Miraftabi, Atusa Moghadam Fard, Azadeh Yavari, Naveed Nilforushan, Samira Chaibakhsh, Navid Abolfathzadeh
{"title":"Effect of Refractive Status on Peripapillary Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness and Vascular Density: A Prospective Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography-Based Study.","authors":"Arezoo Miraftabi, Atusa Moghadam Fard, Azadeh Yavari, Naveed Nilforushan, Samira Chaibakhsh, Navid Abolfathzadeh","doi":"10.47176/mjiri.39.21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There have been different reports of the retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness in myopic and hyperopic patients in optical coherence tomography (OCT)-based studies. This study was conducted to evaluate the correlation between vascular density of the optic nerve head and refractive errors in healthy subjects using OCT-angiography (OCTA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a prospective interventional case series, 47 healthy subjects were enrolled consequently. The target spherical equivalent was -1.00 to +1.00, -1.00 to -6.00, and +1.00 to +4.00 in the emmetropia group (A), myopia group (B), and hyperopia group (C), respectively. The astigmatism was less than 3.00 diopters in all patients. The thickness of the retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL), the vascular density of the optic nerve head (ONH), and the peripapillary area were measured. Statistical independent samples t-tests were used to evaluate between-group differences and the hyperopia group (group C) was considered as the reference group.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-eight eyes from 47 patients were included. Twenty-five eyes (28.4%) were emmetrope, 27 eyes (30.7%) were myopic, and 36 eyes (40.9%) were hyperopic. The mean rim area was significantly lower in myopic eyes than in hyperopic eyes (1.64 vs. 1.80, <i>P</i>=0.039). Although the lowest mean of RNFL thickness was observed in myopic eyes, the difference between groups was not statistically significant. The nasal radial peripapillary capillaries (RPC) were significantly lower in myopic eyes versus hyperopic (49.04 vs.52.72, <i>P</i>=0.006). There was not any significant difference between the mean of RPC capillary inside the disc.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The vascular density in the RPC area was significantly lower in myopic eyes than in hyperopic and emmetropic eyes.</p>","PeriodicalId":18361,"journal":{"name":"Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran","volume":"39 ","pages":"21"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12138764/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47176/mjiri.39.21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There have been different reports of the retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness in myopic and hyperopic patients in optical coherence tomography (OCT)-based studies. This study was conducted to evaluate the correlation between vascular density of the optic nerve head and refractive errors in healthy subjects using OCT-angiography (OCTA).

Methods: In a prospective interventional case series, 47 healthy subjects were enrolled consequently. The target spherical equivalent was -1.00 to +1.00, -1.00 to -6.00, and +1.00 to +4.00 in the emmetropia group (A), myopia group (B), and hyperopia group (C), respectively. The astigmatism was less than 3.00 diopters in all patients. The thickness of the retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL), the vascular density of the optic nerve head (ONH), and the peripapillary area were measured. Statistical independent samples t-tests were used to evaluate between-group differences and the hyperopia group (group C) was considered as the reference group.

Results: Eighty-eight eyes from 47 patients were included. Twenty-five eyes (28.4%) were emmetrope, 27 eyes (30.7%) were myopic, and 36 eyes (40.9%) were hyperopic. The mean rim area was significantly lower in myopic eyes than in hyperopic eyes (1.64 vs. 1.80, P=0.039). Although the lowest mean of RNFL thickness was observed in myopic eyes, the difference between groups was not statistically significant. The nasal radial peripapillary capillaries (RPC) were significantly lower in myopic eyes versus hyperopic (49.04 vs.52.72, P=0.006). There was not any significant difference between the mean of RPC capillary inside the disc.

Conclusion: The vascular density in the RPC area was significantly lower in myopic eyes than in hyperopic and emmetropic eyes.

屈光状态对乳头周围视网膜神经纤维层厚度和血管密度的影响:基于光学相干断层成像的前瞻性研究。
背景:在基于光学相干断层扫描(OCT)的研究中,对近视和远视患者的视网膜神经纤维层(RNFL)厚度有不同的报道。本研究利用oct血管造影(OCTA)评估健康人视神经头血管密度与屈光不正的相关性。方法:在前瞻性介入病例系列中,纳入47名健康受试者。远视组(C)、近视眼组(B)、远视组(A)的目标球等效值分别为-1.00 ~ +1.00、-1.00 ~ -6.00、+1.00 ~ +4.00。所有患者的散光均小于3.00屈光度。测量视网膜神经纤维层厚度(RNFL)、视神经头血管密度(ONH)和乳头周围面积。采用统计学独立样本t检验评价组间差异,以远视组(C组)为参照组。结果:纳入47例患者88只眼。近视眼25只(28.4%),近视眼27只(30.7%),远视眼36只(40.9%)。近视眼的平均眼缘面积明显低于远视眼(1.64比1.80,P=0.039)。虽然近视眼的RNFL厚度平均值最低,但组间差异无统计学意义。近视眼的鼻径向乳头周围毛细血管(RPC)明显低于远视眼(49.04比52.72,P=0.006)。两组椎间盘内RPC毛细血管的平均值无显著性差异。结论:近视眼RPC区血管密度明显低于远视和远视。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
90
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信