Quantification of the Peripapillary Microvasculature in Eyes with Glaucomatous Paracentral Visual Field Loss.
Aged
Cross-Sectional Studies
Glaucoma, Open-Angle
/ diagnosis
Humans
Intraocular Pressure
Microvessels
/ diagnostic imaging
Middle Aged
Nerve Fibers
Optic Disk
/ diagnostic imaging
Prospective Studies
Retinal Ganglion Cells
Retinal Vessels
/ diagnostic imaging
Tomography, Optical Coherence
Visual Fields
Glaucomatous paracentral visual field loss
OCT angiography
Peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer
Primary open-angle glaucoma
Regional peripapillary microvasculature
Journal
Ophthalmology. Glaucoma
ISSN: 2589-4196
Titre abrégé: Ophthalmol Glaucoma
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101730510
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
29
06
2020
revised:
09
10
2020
accepted:
13
10
2020
pubmed:
20
10
2020
medline:
29
10
2021
entrez:
19
10
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To quantify abnormalities in the peripapillary microvasculature in eyes with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and paracentral visual field (VF) loss. Prospective, cross-sectional study. Thirty-three POAG patients, including 15 with paracentral VF loss and 18 with peripheral VF loss, and 31 control participants underwent swept-source OCT angiography (OCTA) of the peripapillary region. The POAG groups were matched by VF mean deviation (MD). The peripapillary microvasculature from the internal limiting membrane to the retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) interface was quantified within a 0.70-mm annulus around Bruch's membrane opening after removal of large vessels. Both vessel density (VD) and the integrated OCTA by ratio analysis signal (IOS) suggestive of flow were measured. Regional VD and IOS were measured from the affected hemisphere corresponding to the VF hemifield of more severe loss, which was used to calculate the paracentral total deviation (PaTD), or total deviation within the central 10°. One eye per participant was included. Difference in peripapillary OCTA measurements between paracentral and peripheral VF loss groups and correlation of peripapillary VD and IOS with PaTD. The POAG groups had matched VF MD (-3.1 ± 2.5 dB paracentral vs. -2.3 ± 2.0 dB peripheral; P = 0.31), did not differ in average RNFL thickness (71.1 ± 14.7 μm vs. 78.1 ± 15.0 μm; P = 0.55), but differed in age (59.2 ± 9.6 years paracentral vs. 67.4 ± 6.6 years peripheral; P = 0.02). Compared with control participants, both paracentral and peripheral VF loss groups showed reduced VD (P < 0.001 and P = 0.009, respectively) and IOS (P < 0.001 and P = 0.01, respectively) in the affected hemisphere. Compared with POAG eyes with peripheral VF loss, the paracentral group showed reduced peripapillary VD (38.0 ± 2.0%, 35.0 ± 2.2%, respectively; P = 0.001) and IOS (44.3 ± 3.1%, 40.4 ± 4.0%, respectively; P = 0.02) in the affected hemisphere. Among all POAG eyes, peripapillary VD and IOS of the affected hemisphere correlated significantly with functional measurement of paracentral loss (PaTD, r = 0.40, P = 0.02; r = 0.45, P = 0.008; respectively). These correlations remained significant after adjusting for age (r = 0.41, P = 0.02; r = 0.47, P = 0.01; respectively). Regional peripapillary microvasculature showed decreased VD and flow in POAG with paracentral loss, supporting its importance in this glaucoma subtype.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33075548
pii: S2589-4196(20)30273-8
doi: 10.1016/j.ogla.2020.10.009
pmc: PMC8771989
mid: NIHMS1769738
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
286-294Subventions
Organisme : NEI NIH HHS
ID : K99 EY028631
Pays : United States
Organisme : NEI NIH HHS
ID : R00 EY028631
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015 Sep;133(9):1045-52
pubmed: 26203793
Biomed Opt Express. 2012 Dec 1;3(12):3127-37
pubmed: 23243564
Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1998 Jun;76(3):273-7
pubmed: 9686836
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2017 Apr 1;58(4):2044-2053
pubmed: 28384725
Dev Ophthalmol. 2016;56:13-7
pubmed: 27023108
Ophthalmology. 2019 Dec;126(12):1675-1684
pubmed: 31358386
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009 Oct;50(10):4709-18
pubmed: 19443718
Ophthalmology. 2002 Apr;109(4):704-11
pubmed: 11927427
Br J Ophthalmol. 1967 Feb;51(2):115-23
pubmed: 4959937
J Glaucoma. 2019 Apr;28(4):281-288
pubmed: 30585943
Clin Ophthalmol. 2018 Nov 05;12:2253-2260
pubmed: 30464386
Ophthalmology. 2013 Aug;120(8):1546-50
pubmed: 23697959
Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2017 Jul 18;6(4):9
pubmed: 28729947
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2018 Sep 4;59(11):4327-4344
pubmed: 30193305
J R Soc Interface. 2015 Feb 6;12(103):
pubmed: 25505132
Clin Ophthalmol. 2017 Dec 08;11:2157-2167
pubmed: 29263644
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012 Jul 20;53(8):4813-20
pubmed: 22714895
Ophthalmology. 2018 Apr;125(4):588-596
pubmed: 29224927
Am J Ophthalmol. 2016 Nov;171:75-83
pubmed: 27590118
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012 Aug 09;53(9):5326-33
pubmed: 22700704
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008 Jul;49(7):3018-25
pubmed: 18378581
Ophthalmology. 2007 Mar;114(3):472-9
pubmed: 17123617
Nat Methods. 2012 Jun 28;9(7):676-82
pubmed: 22743772
Am J Ophthalmol. 1995 Jul;120(1):92-102
pubmed: 7611333
J Vasc Res. 1998 Mar-Apr;35(2):73-84
pubmed: 9588870
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2017 Jul 1;58(9):3637-3645
pubmed: 28728171
Ophthalmology. 2011 Sep;118(9):1782-9
pubmed: 21665283
Ophthalmology. 1997 Nov;104(11):1934-7
pubmed: 9373129
Prog Retin Eye Res. 2018 May;64:1-55
pubmed: 29229445
Am J Ophthalmol. 2018 Apr;188:141-154
pubmed: 29428454
Retina. 2015 Nov;35(11):2163-80
pubmed: 26428607
Clin Ophthalmol. 2017 May 24;11:999-1007
pubmed: 28579751
J Glaucoma. 2018 Jun;27(6):481-489
pubmed: 29664832
Prog Retin Eye Res. 2007 Nov;26(6):688-710
pubmed: 17889587
J Glaucoma. 2017 May;26(5):397-402
pubmed: 28169920
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2015 Mar 03;56(3):2031-42
pubmed: 25736791