AIM: To investigate whether two methods of measuring macular pigment-namely, heterochromatic flicker photometry (HFP) and resonance Raman spectroscopy (RRS)--yield comparable data. METHODS: Macular pigment was measured using HFP and RRS in the right eye of 107 participants aged 20-79 years. Correlations between methods were sought and regression models generated. RRS was recorded as Raman counts and HFP as macular pigment optical density (MPOD). The average of the top three of five Raman counts was compared with MPOD obtained at 0.5 degrees eccentricity, and an integrated measure (spatial profile; MPODsp) computed from four stimulus sizes on HFP. RESULTS: The coefficient of variation was 12.0% for MPODsp and 13.5% for Raman counts. MPODsp exhibited significant correlations with Raman counts (r = 0.260, p = 0.012), whereas MPOD at 0.5 degrees did not correlate significantly (r = 0.163, p = 0.118). MPODsp was not significantly correlated with age (p = 0.062), whereas MPOD at 0.5 degrees was positively correlated (p = 0.011). Raman counts showed a significant decrease with age (p = 0.002) and were significantly lower when pupil size was smaller (p = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a statistically significant correlation, the correlations were weak, with those in excess of 90% of the variance between MPODsp and Raman counts remaining unexplained, meriting further research.
AIM: To investigate whether two methods of measuring macular pigment-namely, heterochromatic flicker photometry (HFP) and resonance Raman spectroscopy (RRS)--yield comparable data. METHODS: Macular pigment was measured using HFP and RRS in the right eye of 107 participants aged 20-79 years. Correlations between methods were sought and regression models generated. RRS was recorded as Raman counts and HFP as macular pigment optical density (MPOD). The average of the top three of five Raman counts was compared with MPOD obtained at 0.5 degrees eccentricity, and an integrated measure (spatial profile; MPODsp) computed from four stimulus sizes on HFP. RESULTS: The coefficient of variation was 12.0% for MPODsp and 13.5% for Raman counts. MPODsp exhibited significant correlations with Raman counts (r = 0.260, p = 0.012), whereas MPOD at 0.5 degrees did not correlate significantly (r = 0.163, p = 0.118). MPODsp was not significantly correlated with age (p = 0.062), whereas MPOD at 0.5 degrees was positively correlated (p = 0.011). Raman counts showed a significant decrease with age (p = 0.002) and were significantly lower when pupil size was smaller (p = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a statistically significant correlation, the correlations were weak, with those in excess of 90% of the variance between MPODsp and Raman counts remaining unexplained, meriting further research.
Authors: Anthony G Robson; Jack D Moreland; Daniel Pauleikhoff; Tony Morrissey; Graham E Holder; Fred W Fitzke; Alan C Bird; Frederik J G M van Kuijk Journal: Vision Res Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 1.886
Authors: Tos T J M Berendschot; Jacqueline J M Willemse-Assink; Mieke Bastiaanse; Paulus T V M de Jong; Dirk van Norren Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Clara Stiebing; Iwan W Schie; Florian Knorr; Michael Schmitt; Nanda Keijzer; Robert Kleemann; Izabella J Jahn; Martin Jahn; Amanda J Kiliaan; Laurin Ginner; Antonia Lichtenegger; Wolfgang Drexler; Rainer A Leitgeb; Jürgen Popp Journal: Neurophotonics Date: 2019-09-03 Impact factor: 3.593